Gasper Gjok Kacaj v. ALBERTO R. GONZALES, United States Attorney General

*The Hon. Ann Aldrich, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by
designation.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 06a0056n.06
Filed: January 20, 2006
04-3315
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
GASPER GJOK KACAJ,
Petitioner,
v.
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, United States
Attorney General,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN
ORDER OF THE BOARD OF
IMMIGRATION APPEALS
Before: DAUGHTREY and MOORE, Circuit Judges; ALDRICH, District Judge.*
PER CURIAM. Petitioner Gasper Gjok Kacaj, an Albanian citizen, entered the
United States illegally on or about June 15, 2001, and was placed in removal proceedings
by the Immigration and Naturalization Service soon thereafter. Kacaj conceded
removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the United
Nations Convention Against Torture. Following a hearing, an immigration judge denied
Kacaj’s application, finding him not to be credible. The Board of Immigration Appeals
summarily affirmed the immigration judge’s decision. Kacaj now requests a petition of

-- 1 of 3 --

04-3315
Kacaj v. Gonzales
- 2 -
review from this court to vacate the Board’s order, but because he is currently in fugitive
status, we decline to review his petition.
The hearing before the immigration judge occurred on September 27, 2002, and
resulted in a denial of relief that Kacaj appealed to the Board, which affirmed the decision
summarily on February 18, 2004. His petition for review was timely filed in this court in
March 2004. On April 26, 2004, the petitioner was served with a notice to report to
Immigration and Customs Enforcement for removal on June 21, 2004. He did not report
at that time, although the record reflects that he did receive and sign for the April 26 notice.
At oral argument before this court on September 19, 2005, his counsel was forced
as an officer of the court to acknowledge that he did not know his client’s whereabouts
although he had received sporadic written communication from Kajac. In the weeks since
the case was submitted, we have had no subsequent notice that Kajac has surrendered
to immigration authorities. We therefore deem it appropriate to grant the respondent’s
motion to dismiss the petition for review.
The fugitive disentitlement doctrine limits access to the federal courts by a fugitive
who has deliberately fled from custody. See In re Prevot, 59 F.3d 556, 562 (6th Cir. 1995).
The doctrine extends to appeals from the Board of Immigration Appeals when an alien fails
to surrender despite a lawful order of deportation. See Sapoundjiev v. Ashcroft, 376 F.3d
727, 728 (7th Cir. 2004); Bar-Levy v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, INS, 990 F.2d 33, 35 (2d Cir.
1993); Arana v. INS, 673 F.2d 75, 77 (3d Cir. 1982); Hussein v. INS, 817 F.2d 63 (9th Cir.

-- 2 of 3 --

04-3315
Kacaj v. Gonzales
- 3 -
1986). Although the invocation of the doctrine is discretionary, in view of the petitioner’s
deliberate refusal to surrender as ordered, we have no choice but to invoke it here.
For the reasons set out above, we DENY the petition for review.

-- 3 of 3 --