June 24, 2021 opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Unpublished

  • Creuzot v. Green, 19-10864, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), appellate jurisdiction
    • Dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction, where appellant timely appealed from a merits judgment under the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was separate from a later-issued fee award judgment, but appellant only briefed the fee-award issue that was not appealed.
  • Ityonzughul v. Garland, 19-60489, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Owen, Haynes, Costa), immigration
    • Denying in part, dismissing in part, and granting in part Nigerian citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying his motion to reopen and for reconsideration.
  • Rabbi v. Garland, 19-60800, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), immigration
    • Denying Bangladeshi citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge (IJ) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the CAT.
  • U.S. v. Hill, 20-10878, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 240-month sentence on guilty-plea conviction of sexual exploitation of children.
  • U.S. v. Thomas, 20-11115, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Higginson), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Fisher v. Bilfinger Industrial Services Inc., 20-30265, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Jones, Costa), Title VII, employment discrimination
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of employee’s discrimination and retaliation claims against employer.
  • U.S. v. Martinez, 20-40669, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Stewart, Dennis), criminal, sentencing, supervised release
    • Vacating substance abuse treatment condition of supervised release term and remanding to district court for resentencing.
  • U.S. v. Dobrovolsky, 20-40680, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Higginson), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Barter, 20-40705, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Elrod, Oldham), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Ramirez-Pacheco, 20-50615, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 30-month sentence for illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Gonzalez-Noriega, 20-50824, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Clement, Haynes), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Singh v. Garland, 20-60055, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Jones, Barksdale, Stewart), immigration
    • Dismissing in part and denying in part Indian citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying his application for: asylum; withholding of removal; and relief under the Convention Against Torture.
  • Tshidibi v. Garland, 20-60431, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), immigration
    • Dismissing in part and denying in part Congolese citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing appeal from IJ order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
  • Perez v. Garland, 20-60595, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), immigration
    • Denying Guatemalan citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying her motion to reopen her removal proceedings in order to apply for asylum.
  • Rebolledo v. Garland, 20-60755, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Jones, Barksdale, Stewart), immigration
    • Dismissing Venezuelan citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing her appeal (which it deemed interlocutory) from an Immigration Judge’s (IJ) granting the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) motion for reconsideration.
  • Kam v. Peyton, 21-10127, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Clement, Higginson, Engelhardt), Rule 60(b)
    • Affirming district court’s denial of Rule 60(b) motion to vacate the court’s prior Rooker-Feldman dismissal of suit against state court judge who handled the plaintiff’s brother’s probate proceeding.