Ahmed Muyingo v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Good Law
456 F. App'x 672
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 31, 201110-72516California323 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Ahmed Zzizinga Muyingo, a native and citizen of Uganda, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir.2008). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to address Muyin-go’s challenge to the BIA’s 2004 order affirming the immigration judge’s decision finding him deportable and ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal based on his criminal convictions, because the petition for review is untimely as to that decision. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(1); Membreno v. Gonzales, 425 F.3d 1227, 1229 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We also lack jurisdiction to address Muyingo’s contention that a change in case law renders the basis for his deportation order invalid and qualifies him for additional forms of relief because he failed to exhaust these issues before the BIA in the motion to reopen currently under review. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir .2004).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.