Jeremias Medrado Pasqual-Andres v. U.S. Attorney General

Circuit 11Aug 4, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 70/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Vacated

The Eleventh Circuit granted Jeremias Medrado Pasqual-Andres’s petition for review, vacating the Board of Immigration Appeals’ refusal to reopen his removal proceedings. The court held that filing a disciplinary complaint with the EOIR—rather than a state bar—strictly (and at minimum substantially) satisfies the third prong of Matter of Lozada, and that substantial rather than strict compliance with Lozada is sufficient.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether strict compliance with all three Lozada requirements is mandatory or whether substantial compliance is sufficient when alleging ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 5Circuit 7

Strict adherence to each Lozada requirement is mandatory; reopening is unavailable without exact compliance.

Circuit 2Circuit 3Circuit 4Circuit 8Circuit 9Circuit 11(this circuit)

Substantial compliance with Lozada is sufficient so long as the policy objectives are satisfied.

Conflict Summary

The Fifth and Seventh Circuits require strict, formulaic compliance with each Lozada procedural step before a petitioner may obtain reopening, whereas the Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth, Ninth, and now Eleventh Circuits permit reopening when the petitioner has substantially complied with Lozada’s requirements, focusing on whether the purposes of Lozada are met.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Jeremias Medrado Pasqual-Andres
Appellee:U.S. Attorney General

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Travis Ramey, University of Alabama School of Law Appellate Advocacy Clinic (with Christopher Alhorn and Sanderson Wall at oral argument)