Perez-Garcia v. Lynch, No. 14-2842 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, a citizen and national of Mexico, seeks review of DHS's orders reinstating a removal order and denying petitioner's motion to reopen the reinstatement order. The court found that substantial evidence supports DHS's decision to reinstate petitioner's prior removal order. In this case, petitioner was presented with the Form I-871 stating that he was an alien subject to removal, but he still did not claim compliance or submit any evidence of compliance during the reinstatement proceeding. Instead, he chose not to make a statement. The court also concluded that petitioner failed to establish the prejudice required to establish a due process violation with regard to the reinstatement proceedings, and the court rejected petitioner's argument that DHS’s procedure in deciding to reinstate a removal order rather than issue a notice to appear to petitioner was arbitrary and capricious. Finally, the court concluded that DHS did not erroneously deny petitioner's motion to reopen the reinstatement where he failed to provide sufficient evidence establishing that he complied with his grant of voluntary departure. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Shepherd, Author, with Wollman and Benton, Circuit Judge] Petition for Review - Immigration. DHS's decision to reinstate petitioner's prior order of removal was supported by substantial evidence and the reinstatement proceedings did not violate his right to due process; DHS's procedure in reinstating the removal order rather than issuing petitioner a notice to appear was not arbitrary or capricious as the streamlined reinstatement procedures under 8 C.F.R. Sec. 241.8 are a valid interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act; DHS's denial of petitioner's motion to reopen the reinstatement in this case is affirmed.
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.