Jafran Ahmed v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAFRAN AHMED,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73176
Agency No. A206-498-945
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 9, 2017**
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jafran Ahmed, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s order affirming the decision of an asylum officer during expedited removal
proceedings. We dismiss the petition for review.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 15 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-73176
We lack jurisdiction to review Ahmed’s removal order because it was issued
pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(B). 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(A)(iii). Ahmed does
not challenge the removal order under any of the “strictly limited” exceptions in 8
U.S.C. § 1252(e) and our jurisdiction does not extend to his challenge to the
validity of the expedited removal order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2)(B) (challenge
to whether alien was removed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1) must be made in
habeas corpus proceedings); Pena v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 452, 456 (9th Cir. 2015)
(court lacks jurisdiction to review any constitutional or statutory claims related to
the underlying expedited removal order).
Ahmed’s motion to stay his removal is denied as moot. The currently
effective temporary stay of removal will expire upon the issuance of the mandate.
Ahmed’s motion to stay the mandate is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --