Summary
finding review of plaintiff's challenge to her removal proceedings premature because there was no final order of removal
Summary of this case from Ogunde v. HolderOpinion
No. 07-60548, Summary Calendar.
June 5, 2008.
Kyle D. Brown, McAllen, TX, for Petitioner.
Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, EM Trominski, District Director, U.S. Immigration Naturalization Service District Directors Office, Harlingen, TX, for Respondent.
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA No. A97 518 705.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Shiva Sharma petitions this court to review a Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Administrative Removal Order issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Notice of Intent charged Sharma with being removable based on prior aggravated felony convictions. Sharma argues that his state convictions for identity theft in the first degree, in violation of N.Y. PENAL LAW § 190.80, do not qualify as aggravated felonies for immigration purposes. Respondent contends that this court lacks jurisdiction over the petition for review because it does not seek review of a final order of removal.
This court examines questions related to its own jurisdiction de novo. See Balogun v. Ashcroft, 270 F.3d 274, 277 (5th Cir. 2001). By statute, this court has jurisdiction to review only final orders of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a); cf. Moreira v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 709, 712-14 (5th Cir. 2007). By its very terms, the Notice of Intent from which Sharma seeks review is not a final order of removal. Thus, this court is without jurisdiction to review it.
Accordingly, the petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.