Zeinalov

Zeinalov v. Gonzales

Good Law
133 F. App'x 362
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 2, 2005No. 03-73740California704 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*363 MEMORANDUM ****

Kamal Kerem Zeinalov (“Petitioner”), a native and citizen of Azerbaijan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to remand removal proceedings for adjustment of status based on his marriage to a United States citizen. The BIA denied Petitioner’s motion because he failed to establish prima fade eligibility for an adjustment of status. A.R. at 4.

We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen or remand for an abuse of discretion. 1 INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 , 112 S.Ct. 719 , 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). The abuse of discretion standard applies “regardless of the underlying basis of the alien’s request [for relief].” Doherty, 502 U.S. at 323 , 112 S.Ct. 719 (quoting INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94 , 99 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 904 , 99 L.Ed.2d 90 (1988)). Therefore, we must affirm the BIA’s denial of Petitioner’s motion to remand unless its decision was “arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law.” See Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS, 213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting Watkins v. INS, 63 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir.1995)).

Petitioner attempted to adjust…

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.