USCA11 Case: 25-11181 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 05/27/2025 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-11181 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ KYRON SHAKEEL SWASO, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A243-002-589 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 25-11181 Document: 9-1 Date Filed: 05/27/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-11181

Before ROSENBAUM, BRASHER, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: Kyron Swaso, an immigration detainee proceeding pro se, was charged as removable under § 237(a)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). During his removal proceedings, Swaso filed a request to be released on bond, which the Immigra- tion Judge (“IJ”) denied in a written decision and order entered on March 6, 2025. Swaso then mailed to us an “Appellate Brief Re- view,” which we construe as a petition for review of the IJ’s March decision and order. The government moves to dismiss Swaso’s petition for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that Swaso’s removal pro- ceedings remain pending and that there is no “final order of re- moval” over which we can exercise appellate jurisdiction.

In immigration cases, our jurisdiction is limited to “final or- der[s] of removal.” INA § 242(a)(1), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1); Jagger- nauth v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 432 F.3d 1346, 1350 (11th Cir. 2005). A final order of removal determines that an alien is removable or directs removal of an alien. See INA §§ 101(a)(47)(A), 240(c)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(47)(A), 1229a(c)(1)(A). Because Swaso’s removal pro- ceedings remain pending, there is no final order of removal, and we thus lack jurisdiction over Swaso’s construed petition for re- view.

Accordingly, the government’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

All other pending motions are DENIED as moot.