CONCORD, N.H. — An immigrant from Brazil who faced deportation and argued that the United States isn’t honoring a 15-year-old agreement allowing him to remain in the country will be allowed to stay for now, according to a federal appeals court ruling Friday.
The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said it needed time to review the case of Renato Filippi, 58, of Nashua, New Hampshire, who was scheduled to be removed on Nov. 6. The panel of three judges said it granted the stay “without reaching any jurisdictional issues or the merits of the petition for review.” It did not specify the length of the stay.
“It is unusual because people try to get this sort of thing done every day and rarely does anyone succeed,” Filippi’s attorney, Robert McDaniel, said following the ruling.
Filippi said he entered the U.S. through Mexico in 2002 with the help of smugglers. He was arrested, but said U.S. authorities recruited him to serve as a confidential informant on the people who assisted with his entry.
He said he was promised he could stay in the U.S. permanently. Now that he faces deportation, he said that he faces death threats from Brazil and fears going back.
Filippi has a Social Security card and a driver’s license, and works as a manager for a self-storage company. He brought his wife and daughter over from Brazil, and bought a house. But when he applied for asylum, the Board of Immigration Appeals said he hadn’t established a case and denied his appeal in 2015.
Filippi had been checking in regularly with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials as part of “order of supervision” requirement for years. During a routine visit to the ICE office in Manchester on Sept. 5, Filippi was given a 60-day notice of his removal.
He sued the government for his case to be heard. A federal judge in New Hampshire said he lacked jurisdiction, so he took his case to the appeals court. He also petitioned the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen his case in light of the Sept. 5 deportation notice.
In its argument for a dismissal, the government said the appeals court has no jurisdiction to issue a decision.