Valencia-Mendoza
Valencia-Mendoza v. Immigration & Naturalization Services
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Samuel Valencia-Mendoza and Maria Refugio Sanchez de Valencia, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the BIA’s decision denying their motion to reopen their proceedings sua sponte pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.2 (a). They also appeal the BIA’s decision that notary fraud did not equitably toll the statute of limitations and restrictions upon the number of motions to reopen they could file under 8 C.F.R. § 3.2 (c)(2). We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to reopen, and otherwise affirm.
*892 Although the case for which we deferred submission, Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 208 F.3d 838 (9th Cir.), reh’g en banc granted, 229 F.3d 860 (9th Cir.2000), did not resolve the jurisdictional question presented here, see Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc), we have since held that this court lacks jurisdiction to review a claim that the BIA should have exercised its sua sponte power to reopen a deportation proceeding. Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1158 (9th Cir.2002). As Ekimian controls, we cannot review the BIA’s decision not to reopen the Valeneia-Mendozas’ deportation proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 3.2 (a).