Background

• Shaboyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of an interim BIA order denying a stay of removal pending the BIA's disposition of a motion to reopen.
• The petition challenges whether the interim order is reviewable and whether jurisdiction exists to review it apart from a final order of removal.
• The court's jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252, focusing on whether the challenged order is a final order of removal.
• INA § 101(a)(47) defines finality for 'orders of removal' and the opinion explains the term's application after IIRIRA restructuring removal proceedings.
• The BIA's interim stay order is not a final order of removal and thus ordinarily not independently reviewable, but may be reviewed as part of a petition for review of a final removal order.
• In this case, no final removal order review was sought for the denial of the stay as an independent matter, so the petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Flores-Miramontes v. INS, 212 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2000) (jurisdiction to review depends on final order)
• Alcala v. Holder, 563 F.3d 1009 (9th Cir. 2009) (limits review to final orders of removal)
• Lopez-Ruiz v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 886 (9th Cir. 2002) (review under §1252 applies to final orders)
• Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2007) (INA §101(a)(47) and finality of removal orders)
• Singh v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2007) (apply INA §101(a)(47) to define order of removal)
• Morales-Izquierdo v. DHS, 600 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2010) (interim orders must be linked to final removal order)
• Dhangu v. INS, 812 F.2d 455 (9th Cir. 1987) (stay orders do not attack underlying deportation order)
• Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm., 525 U.S. 471 (1989) (discretionary decisions reviewed within final order framework)
• Noriega-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 335 F.3d 874 (9th Cir. 2003) (defined 'special inquiry officer' as immigration judge)