Board did not err in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen his deportation proceedings that was filed six years after said proceedings had closed, even though petitioner argued that reopening of proceedings was warranted because notice to appear that initiated said proceedings was defective for failure to contain information regarding time and place of removal proceedings. Instant motion to reopen was untimely since it was filed more than 90 days from date of removal order, and petitioner forfeited any objection to deficiency in notice to appear by not timely raising it in removal proceeding. Also, petitioner could not show valid excuse for said forfeiture nor prejudice arising out of defective notice to appear, where petitioner was sent second notice that contained time and place of removal proceeding. Too, had petitioner made timely challenge to notice to appear, government could have corrected problem and removed all doubt as to whether clock on petitioner’s presence in U.S. had stopped running upon being served with complaint notice to appear.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Immigration