Liu v. Ashcroft , 77 F. App'x 720 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                         United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  October 7, 2003
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 02-61126
    Summary Calendar
    FU QIANG LIU
    Petitioner
    v.
    JOHN ASHCROFT, US ATTORNEY GENERAL
    Respondent
    --------------------
    Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    BIA No. A77 908 695
    --------------------
    Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Fu Qiang Liu, a Chinese national, petitions for review of
    the Board of Immigrations Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision summarily
    affirming the Immigration Judge’s order of removal and denial
    of applications for asylum and withholding of deportation.
    The Government moves to dismiss the appeal because the petition
    for review was not timely filed.
    An alien must file his petition for review “not later than
    30 days after the date of the final order of removal.”       8 U.S.C.
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    No. 02-61126
    -2-
    § 1252(b)(1).   The 30-day filing deadline is jurisdictional.
    Navarro-Miranda v. Ashcroft, 
    330 F.3d 672
    , 676 (5th Cir. 2003).
    The 30-day deadline began to run in the instant case on
    November 19, 2002, when the BIA issued its decision and wrote
    a letter to Liu’s counsel notifying him of the decision.
    The deadline expired on December 19, 2002.   See Karimian-Kaklaki
    v. I.N.S., 
    997 F.2d 108
    , 110-11 (5th Cir. 1993).   Liu’s petition
    for review, filed on December 20, 2002, was one day late.
    Because the petition for review was untimely, this court lacks
    jurisdiction.   See Karimian-Kaklaki, 
    997 F.2d at 111-13
    ; Guirguis
    v. I.N.S., 
    993 F.2d 508
    , 509 (5th Cir. 1993); see also Navarro-
    Miranda, 
    330 F.3d at 676
    .   The Government’s motion to dismiss is
    GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-61126

Citation Numbers: 77 F. App'x 720

Judges: Jolly, King, Per Curiam, Prado

Filed Date: 10/7/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/1/2023