Rodriguez-Celaya v. Attorney General of the United States, 597 F. App'x 79

DHS issued a final removal order against Rodriguez-Celaya for (G) unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (Texas Penal Code §31.07) and (O) illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. §1326.
Government filed two motions to dismiss: first challenging colorable legal issues; second contending cancellation of the order left no live removal order.
Court appointed amicus; government later provided information on cancellation; court found cancellation did not extinguish live controversy.
Record shows Texas conviction not an aggravated felony under the generic theft element requirement.
Conviction for illegal reentry is only an aggravated felony if the prior removal was based on an aggravated felony, which the government concedes the record cannot establish.
Court vacates the order of removal and grants petition for review, holding the order remained extant and subject to review; new removal proceedings have begun.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the petition for review is jurisdictionally proper.	Rodriguez-Celaya asserts colorable legal/factual issues exist.	Government argues issues are not colorable/aggravated felon grounds foreclose review.	Petition review jurisdiction properly exercised.
Whether the cancellation of the removal order moots the case.	Cancellation destroys a live order, extinguishing review.	Cancellation may not moot where live controversy or collateral consequences persist.	Order extant; not moot; review permitted.
Whether Rodriguez-Celaya’s Texas conviction is an aggravated felony under §1101(a)(43)(G).	Conviction lacks generic theft intent element requisite for aggravated felony.	N/A or conceded unlawful application by government.	Not an aggravated felony under the cited basis.
Whether the illegal reentry conviction qualifies as an aggravated felony given the prior removal grounds.	Aggravated felony status cannot be inferred from record; requires prior base.	Record does not show the prior removal was based on an aggravated felony.	Cannot establish aggravated felony under §1101(a)(43)(O) from record.
Whether new removal proceedings render the case dispositive.	N/A	N/A	Court notes new removal proceedings have been initiated and retains authority to review.

Pierre v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 527 F.3d 180 (3d Cir. 2008) (jurisdictional scope extends to legal and factual applications)
Silva-Rengifo v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 473 F.3d 58 (3d Cir. 2007) (jurisdiction over legal and factual issues in removal)
Kamara v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 420 F.3d 202 (3d Cir. 2005) (jurisdictional reach for aggravated-felonies)
Thomas v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 625 F.3d 134 (3d Cir. 2010) (whether a later decision vacates or materially alters an earlier decision)
Khouzam v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 549 F.3d 235 (3d Cir. 2008) (review of final orders of removal under §1252)
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2000) (mootness and ongoing injury analysis)
Mayorga v. Att'y Gen. of the U.S., 757 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2014) (collateral consequences in mootness analysis)
Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013) (categorical approach in aggravated felonies)
Nijhawan v. Holder, 557 U.S. 29 (2009) (circumstance-specific vs modified-categorical approaches)
Abdulai v. Ashcroft, 239 F.3d 542 (3d Cir. 2001) (statutory review limitations in removal cases)
Biskupski v. Attorney General of the United States, 503 F.3d 274 (3d Cir. 2007) (retroactivity and prior convictions in removal)