and Submitted March 9, 2016 Pasadena, California
Amended August 30, 2016
Petition for Review of an Order of the Department of Homeland
Security Agency No. A086-968-871
Tolchin (argued), Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin, Los Angeles,
California, for Petitioner.
Lindsay M. Murphy (argued), Julia J. Tyler, Trial Attorneys;
Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director; Stuart F. Delery,
Assistant Attorney General; United States Department of
Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division,
Washington D.C.; for Respondent.
Before: Richard R. Clifton and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit
Judges and Frederic Block, [*] Senior District Judge.
AND AMENDED OPINION
panel denied Francisca Morales de Soto's petition for
review of the reinstatement by the Immigration and Customs
Enforcement agency of the Department of Homeland Security of
a prior expedited removal order issued against her.
panel held that nothing in the facts of Morales's case
justified remand for reconsideration of the reinstated
removal order. The panel held that an agency's
intervening memoranda pertaining to the exercise of
prosecutorial discretion that do not change the law to be
applied by an appellate court do not require remand to the
panel also held that Immigration and Customs Enforcement did
not abuse its discretion in reinstating removal before
allowing Morales to exhaust her administrative appeals from
the denial of her separate petition for consent to reapply
for admission. The panel held that there is no legal
requirement for the government to wait until all other
administrative appeals have been exhausted before reinstating
opinion filed on May 31, 2016, is hereby amended as follows:
page 5 of the slip opinion, in the first full paragraph, the
following sentence should be added after the sentence ending
with "Morales does not challenge the legitimacy of her
January 2000 expedited order of removal."
Her petition therefore does not fall afoul of the INA's
jurisdictional bar against collaterally attacking expedited
orders of removal. See Garcia de Rincon v. Dep't of
Homeland Sec., 539 F.3d 1133, 1139 (9th Cir. 2008).
page 7 of the slip opinion, in the second paragraph, the
citation to Garcia de Rincon v. Dep't of Homeland
Sec. on the fifth line of that paragraph should be
changed to "Garcia de Rincon, 539 F.3d at
these amendments, the panel has voted to deny the petition
for panel rehearing. Judges Clifton and Ikuta have voted to
deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Block has
Petition for Rehearing En Banc has been circulated to the
full court, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to
rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35.
petitions for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc are
DENIED. No further ...