Valle

Valle v. Gonzales

Good Law
138 F. App'x 979
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2005No. 04-72049California368 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Elpidio Valle (a.k.a. Jose Carrera), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings held in absentia. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Where, as here, the BIA adopts the IJ’s findings and conclusions and provides reasons of its own, we review both decisions. See Katana v. INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir. 2000). We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion, Celis-Castellano v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 888, 890 (9th Cir.2002), and review factual findings for substantial evidence, Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279, 1281 (9th Cir.2001). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

*980 The agency did not abuse its discretion in determining that the unsigned note from a medical clinic and the affidavit Valle submitted with his motion to reopen failed to demonstrate Valle suffered from a serious illness sufficient to establish exceptional circumstances for failing to appear at his removal hearing. See Celis-Castellano, 298 F.3d at 891-92 (explaining that…

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.