11th Cir.

MICHEL ROJAS PRIETO v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL

April 9, 2026 ·26-11072 ·Per Curiam · By Raj Patel

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed a petition for review because the underlying immigration proceedings were dismissed rather than resulting in a final order of removal. The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review orders dismissing removal proceedings under the governing statute.

Background

Michel Rojas Prieto, a native and citizen of Cuba proceeding pro se, petitioned the court for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order. The Board had affirmed an immigration judge’s order granting the Department of Homeland Security’s motion to dismiss removal proceedings against Prieto under Section one two three nine point two of the Code of Federal Regulations. The government moved to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

The court’s reasoning

The court explained that it generally has jurisdiction only to review final orders of removal. After removal proceedings commence, the Department of Homeland Security may move to dismiss them under specific regulations. The court found it lacked jurisdiction over the petition because Prieto had not brought a final order of removal. The Board’s order affirming the dismissal of proceedings was not a final order of removal, and the record showed no final order of removal had been obtained.

What it means going forward

The dismissal of the petition leaves the dismissal of the removal proceedings in place, effectively ending the immigration case without a final order of removal being entered against the petitioner.