Ramer Rani v. Matthew Whitaker, No. 17-60526 (5th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 17-60526 Document: 00514796621 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/15/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Fifth Circuit FILED No. 17-60526 January 15, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk RAMER RANI, also known as Rani-Raner, also known as Rashpal Kaur, Petitioner, v. MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A070 430 065 Before JONES, HAYNES, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ramer Rani petitions for review of an agency decision denying her motion to reopen her 1990 deportation proceedings. The Board of Immigration Appeals denied relief on May 23, 2017; Rani’s counsel filed a petition for review (in the wrong court) 31 days later. See Rani v. Sessions, No. 17-71843, ECF No. 1-3 (9th Cir. June 23, 2017). That is one day too late. A petition for review must be filed within “30 days after the date of the final order of removal,” including denial of a motion to reopen. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1), (b)(6). That Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 17-60526 Document: 00514796621 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/15/2019 No. 17-60526 deadline is jurisdictional. See Navarro-Miranda v. Ashcroft, 330 F.3d 672, 676 (5th Cir. 2003). Rani argues she should have three extra days under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d) because she received the BIA’s order by mail. Of course, that rule does not apply to filings in this Court. And in all events, neither that rule nor its counterpart in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(c) applies to deadlines triggered by BIA orders. See, e.g., Hong v. Smith, 129 F.3d 824, 825 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, we DISMISS Rani’s petition for lack of jurisdiction. 2

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.