Case: 19-60415 Document: 00515956263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/28/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
July 28, 2021
No. 19-60415
Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar
Clerk
Rosa Maria Navarrete-Lopez,
Petitioner,
versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A098 042 434
ON REMAND FROM
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Rosa Maria Navarrete-Lopez petitioned for review of an October 20,
2017, Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying her motion
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 19-60415 Document: 00515956263 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/28/2021
No. 19-60415
to reopen. The court denied her petition, holding that, inter alia, her claim—
that the stop-time rule of 8 U.S.C. § 1229(d)(1)(A) never triggered—was
meritless. Navarrete-Lopez petitioned for a writ of certiorari, and, following
the Supreme Court’s holding in Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S. Ct. 1474
(2021), the Court granted, vacated, and remanded for further consideration.
Navarrete-Lopez received a notice to appear that failed to list the date
and time of the removal hearing. She then received a corrective notice of
hearing. The BIA concluded that this process was sufficient to trigger the
stop-time rule. But Niz-Chavez prohibits the use of such a two-step process
to trigger the stop-time rule. See Niz-Chavez, 141 S. Ct. at 1480 (holding that
to trigger the stop-time rule, the government must serve “‘a’ single
document containing the required information, not a mishmash of pieces
with some assembly required”). Navarette-Lopez’ petition is therefore
granted as to the stop-time issue and denied in all other respects for the
reasons laid out in our prior order. 1
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review is GRANTED IN
PART and the matter is hereby REMANDED to the BIA.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition is DENIED on
the remaining grounds.
1
Niz-Chavez does not affect our jurisdictional holding. See Maniar v. Garland, 998
F.3d 235, 242 n.2 (5th Cir. 2021).
2