Pedro Rodriguez-Garcia was ordered removed by an immigration judge after being served a document titled "Notice to Appear" that did not tell Mr. Rodriguez-Garcia when to appear for his removal proceedings. Federal law requires that noncitizens facing removal proceedings be served a Notice to Appear with a hearing time. 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1)(G)(i). Mr. Rodriguez-Garcia was convicted of illegal reentry based on that putative removal order.

The question presented is:

1. Did the immigration court lack authority to remove Mr. Rodriguez-Garcia because he was served a Notice to Appear that did not comply with federal law because it lacked a hearing time?

2. In an illegal re entry prosecution, can the defendant attack the jurisdictional basis for a removal order outside the 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d) requirements for a collateral attack? If not, is § 1326(d) unconstitu tional?

Did the immigration court lack authority to remove Mr. Rodriguez-Garcia because he was served a Notice to Appear that did not comply with federal law because it lacked a hearing time?