NAVARRETE LOPEZ v. GARLAND (2021)

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Rosa Maria Navarrete-Lopez petitioned for review of an October 20, 2017, Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying her motion to reopen. The court denied her petition, holding that, inter alia, her claim—that the stop-time rule of 8 U.S.C. § 1229(d)(1)(A) never triggered—was meritless. Navarrete-Lopez petitioned for a writ of certiorari, and, following the Supreme Court's holding in Niz-Chavez v. Garland, ––– U.S. ––––, 141 S. Ct. 1474, 209 L.Ed.2d 433 (2021), the Court granted, vacated, and remanded for further consideration.

Navarrete-Lopez received a notice to appear that failed to list the date and time of the removal hearing. She then received a corrective notice of hearing. The BIA concluded that this process was sufficient to trigger the stop-time rule. But Niz-Chavez prohibits the use of such a two-step process to trigger the stop-time rule. See Niz-Chavez, 141 S. Ct. at 1480 (holding that to trigger the stop-time rule, the government must serve “ ‘a’ single document containing the required information, not a mishmash of pieces with some assembly required”). Navarette-Lopez’ petition is therefore granted as to the stop-time issue and denied in all other respects for the reasons laid out in our prior order.¹

IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review is GRANTED IN PART and the matter is hereby REMANDED to the BIA.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition is DENIED on the remaining grounds.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

1.   Niz-Chavez does not affect our jurisdictional holding. See Maniar v. Garland, 998 F.3d 235, 242 n.2 (5th Cir. 2021).

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.