Miranda

Miranda v. Mukasey

Good Law
301 F. App'x 623
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 13, 2008No. 08-73087California288 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s second motion to reopen removal proceedings.

We review the BIA’s ruling on a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir.2008).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in construing petitioner’s “motion for administrative closure” as a motion to reopen. In this motion, petitioner sought administrative closure to pursue possible amnesty relief should Congress pass amnesty legislation. The BIA stated correctly that the motion was filed after the final administrative decision had been entered, thus, there were no administrative proceedings to close.

The regulations provide that an alien who is subject to a final order of removal is limited to filing one motion to reopen removal proceedings, and that motion must be filed within 90 days of the date of entry of a final order of removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(A), (C)(i); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). Because petitioner’s second motion to reopen was filed beyond the 90-day deadline, and petitioner has not contended that any exceptions to this time limit apply, the BIA did not abuse…

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.