Woldegiorgise v. Holder, 061312 FED5, 12-60331

Docket Nº:12-60331
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM:
Party Name:DEREJE YEMANE WOLDEGIORGISE, Petitioner v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent
Judge Panel:Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:June 13, 2012
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

DEREJE YEMANE WOLDEGIORGISE, Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent

No. 12-60331

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

June 13, 2012

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: [*]

The Government moves to dismiss Derek Woldegiorgise's ("Woldegiorgise") petition for review.1 Because we dismiss his appeal on an alternative basis, the Government's motion is moot.

In responding to the Government's motion, Woldegiorgise asserts that the Government has misconstrued his request for relief and clarifies that he has not petitioned this court to review the Board of Immigration Appeal's final order. He explains that he instead sought this court's stay to support a coram nobis motion currently pending before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. See Woldegiorgise v. Thaler, No. 4:12-CV-1318 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 24, 2012).

Woldegiorgise seeks relief from the district court and raises arguments before this court that have not yet been addressed by the district court. We lack jurisdiction and DISMISS his appeal. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292 (limiting our jurisdiction over district court orders to final judgments and some interlocutory orders); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(C) (instructing us to treat appeals from coram nobis motions...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP