AI FU JIN v. BARR (2020)

SUMMARY ORDER

Petitioners Ai Fu Jin and Jian Le Li, natives and citizens of the People's Republic of China, seek review of a December 21, 2018, decision of the BIA denying their motion to reconsider and terminate removal proceedings. In re Ai Fu Jin, Jian Le Li, Nos. A077 927 566/568 (BIA Dec. 21, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history.

We review the BIA's denial of reconsideration for abuse of discretion. See Jin Ming Liu v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 109, 111 (2d Cir. 2006). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Petitioners’ argument that their removal proceedings should be terminated pursuant to Pereira v. Sessions, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S. Ct. 2105, 201 L.Ed.2d 433 (2018). Petitioners argued that their notices to appear (“NTA”) did not include a hearing date and time and thus were insufficient to commence removal proceedings. We have held, however, “that an NTA that omits information regarding the time and date of the initial removal hearing is nevertheless adequate to vest jurisdiction in the Immigration Court, at least so long as a notice of hearing specifying this information is later sent to the alien.” Banegas Gomez v. Barr, 922 F.3d 101, 112 (2d Cir. 2019). Although Petitioners’ NTAs did not specify the date and time of their initial hearing, they unquestionably received notice of their hearings at which they appeared. Accordingly, their argument that their removal order should be reconsidered and proceedings terminated is foreclosed by Banegas Gomez.

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED. All pending motions and applications are DENIED and stays VACATED.