Maatougui v. Holder
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25674
10th Cir.2013Background
- Nadia Maatougui, a Moroccan national, resident in the United States since 2000, was found removable for marriage fraud in 2004.
- She pursued asylum and four other forms of relief after the removal finding, with IJ and BIA decisions denying relief in 2009.
- The key credibility determinations centered on Gearhart’s credibility and Maatougui’s credibility, including inconsistencies about marriage and child(ren).
- Maatougui later filed a motion to reopen based on changed country conditions in Morocco and an ineffective-assistance claim regarding her 2004 counsel.
- The BIA denied the motion to reopen, concluding the new evidence was either available earlier, cumulative, or unlikely to change the outcome, and found the IAC claim untimely.
- The court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over removal-related claims and denied the petition to review the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has jurisdiction to review credibility determinations for removal relief | Maatougui argues the IJ/BIA erred in credibility and weighting of evidence for hardship/cancellation. | Court must defer to agency credibility determinations under the Real ID Act. | The court has no jurisdiction to review credibility determinations for removal relief. |
| Whether the BIA abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen on changed country conditions | New Morocco conditions support asylum/withholding/CAT relief if reopened. | Evidence was available previously, cumulative, or would not change the outcome. | No abuse of discretion; BIA properly denied reopening on changed-country-conditions grounds. |
| Whether the BIA abused its discretion in denying the IAC (ineffective assistance of counsel) claim | Former counsel’s failures justify reopening due to ineffective assistance. | IAC claims were not timely raised and evidence was previously available. | BIA did not abuse discretion; IAC claim was not timely raised and evidence not unavailable earlier. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ismaiel v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2008) (limits circuit review of credibility determinations under Real ID Act)
- Iliev v. Holder, 613 F.3d 1019 (10th Cir. 2010) (credibility and weighing are within agency discretion in cancellation/removal context)
- Infanzon v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1359 (10th Cir. 2004) (motion to reopen standards and deference to agency decisions)
- Abudu v. INS, 485 U.S. 94 (1988) (standard for public-interest implications in relief decisions)
- Osei v. INS, 305 F.3d 1205 (10th Cir. 2002) (regarding procedural adequacy in IAC-related motions to reopen)
- Mickeviciute v. INS, 327 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 2003) (cited for record-review limitations on BIA reasoning)