Opinions of the United 2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

8-29-2005

Paripovic v. Atty Gen USA Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential

Docket No. 03-4193

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005

Recommended Citation "Paripovic v. Atty Gen USA" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 584. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/584

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 03-4193

ZELJKO PARIPOVIC Petitioner

v.

*ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

* Substituted pursuant to Rule 43c, F.R.A.P.

On Appeal from an Order entered before The Board of Immigration Appeals (No. A72-780-152)

Argued December 13, 2004

Before: AMBRO, VAN ANTWERPEN and STAPLETON, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed August 12, 2005)

Sunit K. Joshi, Esquire (Argued) Sokol Braha, Esquire Joshi & Associates, P.C. 225 Broadway, Suite 705 New York, NY 10007

Attorneys for Petitioner

Peter D. Keisler Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Richard M. Evans Assistant Director Douglas Ginsburg, Esquire John D. Williams, Esquire David E. Dauenheimer, Esquire (Argued) United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 878, Ben Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044

Attorneys for Respondent

ORDER AMENDING PUBLISHED OPINION

AMBRO, Circuit Judge

IT IS NOW ORDERED that the published Opinion in the above case filed August 12, 2005, be amended as follows:

On page 7, replace the entire paragraph in the middle of the page beginning “Because Paripovic’s deportation . . . (Sept. 30, 1996).”, with the following:

At the time Paripovic’s petition for review (which relates to deportation proceedings begun prior to April 1, 1997) was filed, our jurisdiction arose from the former Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 106(a) and was governed by the “transitional rules” of § 309(c) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996,

Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996). On May 11, 2005, Congress enacted The REAL ID Act, which provides, inter alia, that a “petition for review filed under former section 106(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act . . . shall be treated as if it had been filed as a petition for review under [

], as amended by this section.” REAL ID Act § 106(d),

-311 (May 11, 2005). Thus, our jurisdiction now arises under

, as amended by The REAL ID Act. Cf. Elia v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __,

(6th Cir. July 22, 2005).

By the Court,

/s/ Thomas L. Ambro, Circuit Judge Dated: August 29, 2005