Nunez

Nunez v. Gonzales

Good Law
166 F. App'x 995
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 2006No. 04-75065California273 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Fabiola Mar Nunez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions 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 the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen because Nunez failed to present any evidence to support her assertion that her child would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if she were removed. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(1) (providing that a motion to reopen “shall be supported by affidavits or other evidentiary material”). Absent such evidence, the BIA properly concluded that Nunez failed to show prima facie eligibility for cancellation of removal. *996 See Ordonez, 345 F.3d at 785 (holding that prima facie eligibility is demonstrated by a showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Nunez’s challenge to the BIA’s…

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.