Kenzo Roberts v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 23-13403 (11th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

USCA11 Case: 23-13403 Document: 5-1 Date Filed: 12/06/2023 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-13403 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ KENZO ROBERTS, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A208-054-197 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 23-13403 2 Document: 5-1 Date Filed: 12/06/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 2 23-13403 Before NEWSOM, LAGOA, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. The 30-day statutory time limit established in the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) required Kenzo Roberts to file a petition for review of the September 6, 2023, decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming his order of removal on or before October 6, 2023. See INA §§ 101(a)(47), 240(c)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(47), 1229a(c)(1)(A); INA § 242(b)(1)-(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1)-(2); see also Dakane v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 399 F.3d 1269, 1272 n.3 (11th Cir. 2005) (“[A] petitioner has 30 days from the date of the final order of removal to seek review in this Court.”). However, Roberts did not file a petition for review until October 10, 2023. Thus, the petition for review is untimely as to the BIA decision and we lack jurisdiction to review it. See Fed. R. App. P. 15(a)(1). No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.