Onofre-Gomez

Onofre-Gomez v. Gonzales

Good Law
158 F. App'x 837
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 13, 2005No. 04-74981; Agency Nos. A78-076-391, A78-076-392California384 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Celia Onofre-Gomez and Juan RiveraGarduno, wife and husband and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo purely legal questions including due process claims. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny in part, and dismiss in part, the petition for review.

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA should have invoked its sua sponte authority to reopen is unavailing because we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision whether to invoke that authority. See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.2002).

Petitioners’ contention that their failure to file a timely motion to reopen should be excused so that we may correct a “miscarriage of justice” is also unavailing. The “miscarriage of justice” to which petitioners point is the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) alleged failure to consider an unsigned letter in finding that petitioners had not satisfied the continuous physical presence requirement for…

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.