Manuel Antonio Espinoza-Beteta v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

37 F.3d 1504 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Manuel Antonio ESPINOZA-BETETA, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. No. 93-70770. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 3, 1994. * Decided Oct. 5, 1994. Before: GOODWIN, O'SCANNLAIN and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 We reject Espinoza-Beteta's argument that the BIA abused its discretion in its use of administrative notice. The purpose of a warning of intention to take administrative notice would have been to give the parties an opportunity to brief the matter or move for other relief: 3 The agency should have warned that it would consider these facts even though they were not in existence at the time of the hearing and appellate briefs, so that the parties could have moved for leave to supplement their briefs, supplement the evidence, withdraw their application for asylum, or seek other relief. The agency should also have warned, prior to final…