Arakelyan

Arakelyan v. Gonzales

Good Law
176 F. App'x 794
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 12, 2006No. 04-74366California300 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

*795 Levon Arakelyan, his wife, Alvina Gregoryan, and their two children, Artur Arakelyan and Arman Arakelyan, are natives and citizens of Armenia.

We lack jurisdiction to review the petitioners’ challenge to the BIA’s March 23, 2004, decision because the petitioners did not file a petition for review within thirty days of the BIA’s decision, and their subsequent motion to reopen did not toll the filing deadline. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(1); see also Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1258 (9th Cir.1996). Accordingly we dismiss this part of the petition.

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 to review the petitioners’ contention regarding the motion to reopen. This court reviews a denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 965-66 (9th Cir. 2002).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied the petitioners’ motion to reopen to reapply for asylum and withholding of removal based on changed circumstances in Armenia. The articles submitted by petitioners constituted only general background material on problems for political opposition parties, and the death certificates of Levon Arakelyan’s brother and…

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.