Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
MAHBOD GHAZAN FARI, also known as Max Fari, Petitioner v. DANA BOENTE, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent
Mahbod Ghazan Fari, a native and citizen of Iran, petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his untimely motion to reopen removal proceedings in which he was found ineligible for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Fari asserts that the BIA erred in denying his request to reopen his removal proceedings for withholding of removal under the CAT based on changed country conditions. The Government contends that this court lacks jurisdiction to review the petition.
The order for Fari's removal results from his conviction of an aggravated felony. Fari does not dispute that he was convicted of an aggravated felony. Due to Fari's aggravated felony conviction, our review is limited by statute to constitutional or legal claims. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) & (D); Siwe v. Holder, 742 F.3d 603, 607 (5th Cir. 2014). In this context, we do not have jurisdiction to review factual determinations made by the BIA. See Escudero-Arciniega v. Holder, 702 F.3d 781, 785 (5th Cir. 2012). In the instant matter, Fari is challenging only the BIA's factual determinations. Because we “would not have had the authority to review a direct petition,” Fari “cannot manufacture jurisdiction simply by petitioning this court to review the BIA's denial of his motion to reopen.” Assaad v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 471, 475 (5th Cir. 2004).
Fari's petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM:*
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 15-60806
Decided: February 01, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)