Doho

Doho v. Ashcroft

Good Law
84 F. App'x 784
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 2003No. 03-70527California262 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Arsene Beaudelaire Doho, a native and citizen of the Ivory Coast, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Doho’s motion to reopen based on new evidence. The newspaper articles Doho submitted do not establish prima facie eligibility for asylum because Doho failed to show that the current government or the rebels fighting the government would be interested in Doho. See Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 365, 376 (9th Cir.2003).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision dismissing Doho’s appeal of an immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture because Doho did not file *785 his petition fox' review with this Court within 30 days of the BIA’s ox’der of dismissal, and the motion to reopen does not toll the time to file a petition for review. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94…

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.