Pillco v. Sessions


16‐4284 Pillco v. Sessions UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURTʹS LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION ʺSUMMARY ORDERʺ). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second 2 Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in 3 the City of New York, on the 20th day of December, two thousand seventeen. 4 5 PRESENT: REENA RAGGI, 6 PETER W. HALL, 7 DENNY CHIN, 8 Circuit Judges. 9 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐x 10 11 GUILLERMO TEODORO PILLCO, AKA Guillermo 12 Teodoro Pillco Arias, 13 Petitioner, 14 15 v. 16‐4284 16 17 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, United States 18 Attorney General, 19 Respondent. 20 21 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐x 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Guillermo Teodoro Pillco, pro se, Kearny, New 24 Jersey. 25 1 FOR RESPONDENT: Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant 2 Attorney General; Jessica E. Burns, Senior 3 Litigation Counsel; Regan Hildebrand, Senior 4 Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration 5 Litigation, United States Department of Justice, 6 Washington, D.C. 7 8 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, 9 ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that petitionerʹs motions to proceed in forma pauperis 10 (ʺIFPʺ), for appointment of counsel, and for a stay of removal proceedings are DENIED. 11 Petitioner Guillermo Teodoro Pillco, a native and citizen of Ecuador, seeks 12 IFP status, appointment of counsel, and a stay of removal in connection with his 13 petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (ʺBIAʺ) denying 14 his motion to reopen. See In re Guillermo Teodoro Pillco, No. A094 880 165 (B.I.A. Dec. 14, 15 2016). We assume the partiesʹ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural 16 history in this case. 17 Pillco entered the United States without authorization in 2002 and was 18 placed in removal proceedings in 2007. He applied for asylum and related relief based 19 on his fear of the Ecuadorian thieves who had stolen cattle from his familyʹs farm, 20 assaulted his grandmother, and threatened to kill him if he returned to Ecuador. In ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals