Wildin Guillen-Acosta v. William Barr ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 19-1447
    WILDIN DAVID GUILLEN-ACOSTA,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
    Submitted: November 19, 2019                                      Decided: April 2, 2020
    Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
    Petition granted and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Sarah Maryam Al-Zoubi, BULL CITY LAWYER, Durham, North Carolina, for Petitioner.
    Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Laura
    Halliday Hickein, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Wildin David Guillen-Acosta, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review
    of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the
    immigration judge’s (IJ) decision denying his motion for administrative closure, denying
    his motion for a continuance, and ordering him removed to Honduras. We grant the
    petition for review.
    The Board, in affirming the IJ’s denial of administrative closure, relied on the
    Attorney General’s opinion in In re Castro-Tum, 27 I. & N. Dec. 271 (A.G. 2018), which
    held that IJs and the Board do not have the general authority to administratively close cases.
    While this case was pending on appeal, we overturned this holding in Zuniga Romero v.
    Barr, 
    937 F.3d 282
    , 294 (4th Cir. 2019) (identifying the various regulations at issue and
    concluding that they “unambiguously confer upon IJs and the [Board] the general authority
    to administratively close cases”). We therefore grant the petition for review and remand
    for further consideration in light of Zuniga Romero. We dispense with oral argument
    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION GRANTED AND REMANDED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-1447

Filed Date: 4/2/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/2/2020