Case: 17-14998 Date Filed: 08/08/2019 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 17-14998
________________________
Agency No. A209-230-480
SUKIRTHAN SINNARTHURI,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
________________________
(August 8, 2019)
Before WILSON and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges, and COOGLER, * District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
*
Honorable L. Scott Coogler, District Judge for the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama, sitting by designation.
Case: 17-14998 Date Filed: 08/08/2019 Page: 2 of 2
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the denial of Sukirthan
Sinnarthuri’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
Convention Against Torture (CAT). Sinnarthuri petitioned for review. While that
petition was pending in this Court, the BIA granted Sinnarthuri’s motion to reopen
his immigration proceedings based on new evidence. The government then filed a
motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. While that motion was
pending, an Immigration Judge (IJ) in the reopened proceedings granted
Sinnarthuri’s petition for asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158. Sinnarthuri was
subsequently released from detention.
“If events that occur subsequent to the filing of a lawsuit or an appeal
deprive the court of the ability to give the plaintiff or appellant meaningful relief,
then the case is moot and must be dismissed.” Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 273 F.3d
1330, 1336 (11th Cir. 2001). Because the IJ in the reopened proceedings granted
Sinnarthuri the precise relief he sought—asylum—this case “no longer presents a
live controversy” over which we may exercise jurisdiction. Id. Accordingly, the
appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED.
2