Sidineia DeSouza Santana DaSilva, et al v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 24-10069 (11th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 24-10069 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-10069 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ SIDINEIA DESOUZA SANTANA DASILVA, ALTAIR ROBERTO DASILVA, ITALO GUTIERRY SANTANA DASILVA, Petitioners, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals USCA11 Case: 24-10069 2 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 24-10069 Agency No. A220-358-981 ____________________ Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM, and GRANT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Altair Roberto Da Silva, Sidineia DeSouza Santana Da Silva, and Italo Gutierry Santana Da Silva, natives and citizens of Brazil, appeal the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s order of removal from the United States. The 30-day statutory time limit required them to file a notice of appeal from the BIA’s final order of removal entered on November 21, 2023 by December 21, 2023. 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 our [c]ourt.”). However, the Da Silvas did not file their notice of appeal until January 8, 2024. Further, the Da Silvas cannot claim any exemption or equitable tolling. See Chao Lin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 677 F.3d 1043, 1045 (11th Cir. 2012) (holding that the statutory time limit for filing a petition for review in an immigration proceeding is mandatory and jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling). Accordingly, the notice of appeal is untimely and cannot invoke our jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. P. 15(a)(1) (noting that a petition for review of an USCA11 Case: 24-10069 24-10069 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 agency decision must be filed in the court of appeals “within the time prescribed by law”). All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 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.
