Sergio Isunza v. Loretta E. Lynch, 809 F.3d 971

Sergio Isunza, a Mexican national, became a U.S. permanent resident in 1994. In 1998 he was convicted of possession of cocaine and placed on probation.
After the 1998 conviction, Isunza traveled to Mexico and returned multiple times (2000, 2001, 2006, 2011); his green card was confiscated when he returned in 2011.
DHS charged removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) for a controlled-substance offense; Isunza conceded removability and sought cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a).
The immigration judge held Isunza ineligible for cancellation because the 1998 drug conviction permanently halted accrual of continuous residency (8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(1)). The BIA affirmed and dismissed his appeal.
Isunza did not seek judicial review of the BIA’s dismissal, but moved the BIA to reconsider, raising an argument that his admission as a minor should count toward continuous residency; the BIA denied reconsideration.
Isunza petitioned this court challenging the BIA’s denial of reconsideration; the court’s review was limited by statutory bars on jurisdiction for drug-offense removability and the 30-day deadline for review of the original BIA dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction over BIA denial of reconsideration	Court can review BIA denial of motion to reconsider	Court lacks jurisdiction over discretionary BIA decisions for drug-offense removables	Limited jurisdiction: may review only legal/constitutional claims; discretionary denial not reviewable
Whether reentry restarts continuous-residence clock after 1998 drug conviction	Isunza: 2000 reentry was an "admission in any status" that restarts the clock	DHS/BIA: qualifying drug conviction is a terminating event; reentry does not restart clock	Held for BIA: conviction permanently terminated accrual; reentry does not restart clock
Whether BIA abused discretion by refusing to reconsider new argument	Isunza: admission-as-minor argument should be considered	BIA: motion raised a new argument that could have been presented on appeal; reconsideration not for new arguments	BIA acted within discretion; denial not reviewable here

Muratoski v. Holder, 622 F.3d 824 (7th Cir. 2010) (jurisdictional deadline to seek review of BIA decisions)
Garcia v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 487 (7th Cir. 2005) (statutory limits on review for certain criminal removability)
Zivkovic v. Holder, 724 F.3d 894 (7th Cir. 2013) (deference to BIA statutory constructions)
I.N.S. v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415 (1999) (deference to agency interpretation of immigration statutes)
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (framework for judicial deference to agency interpretations)
Okeke v. Gonzales, 407 F.3d 585 (3d Cir. 2005) (reentry can restart continuous-presence clock in distinguishable facts)
Nelson v. Attorney Gen. of U.S., 685 F.3d 318 (3d Cir. 2012) (affirming BIA that qualifying crime permanently stops accrual)
Singh v. Attorney Gen. of U.S., 807 F.3d 547 (3d Cir. 2015) (cabining Okeke; residency clock stops for qualifying crimes)
Torres-Rendon v. Holder, 656 F.3d 456 (7th Cir. 2011) (Seventh Circuit decline to follow Okeke; clock cannot restart after drug crime)