Julio Ascorra-Sarmiento v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Good Law
479 F. App'x 112
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 17, 201209-73665California324 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Julio Roberto Ascorra-Sarmiento, Betty Ascorra, and their son, natives and citizens of Peru, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their motion to reopen deportation proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir.2011), and we deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen for failure to show lack of notice where the notice of hearing was sent by certified mail to their last known address. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(a)(2)(A), (c)(1) (repealed); see also Arrieta v. INS, 117 F.3d 429, 431 (9th Cir.1997) (per curiam) (“[Njotice by certified mail sent to an alien’s last known address can be sufficient under the Act, even if no one signed for it”).

The agency also did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely where it was filed nearly eleven years after their order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23 (b)(4)(íií)(A)(1) (an alien seeking…

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.