Antunez
Antunez v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Teodora Rodriguez Antunez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review constitutional issues de novo. See Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Rodriguez Antunez’s challenge to the BIA’s final removal order entered on May 3, 2002, because petitioner did not timely petition for review of that order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b); Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405-06 , 115 S.Ct. 1537 , 131 L.Ed.2d 465 (1993).
We do not review the BIA’s determination that Rodriguez Antunez’s motion to reopen was not timely filed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2)-(3), because Rodriguez Antunez did not challenge the BIA’s order in her opening brief. See Martinez- *846 Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir.1996).
Rodriguez Antunez contends that it violates equal protection to require Mexicans to prove exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative when applicants from…