Perez-Castaneda

Perez-Castaneda v. Mukasey

Good Law
301 F. App'x 632
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2008No. 08-72637California382 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioners’ second motion to reopen as both untimely and barred by numerical limitations.

We review the denial of motions to reopen for abuse of discretion. See Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir.2008). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in construing petitioners’ “motion for administrative closure” as a motion to reopen. In this motion, petitioners sought administrative closure to pursue possible immigration relief should Congress pass immigration legislation that might be of benefit to them. The motion was filed after a final administrative order of removal had been entered; thus, there were no administrative proceedings to close.

In addition, the regulations provide that a party may file only one motion to reopen removal proceedings and the motion to reopen must be filed not later than ninety days after the date on which the final order of removal was entered. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). A review of the administrative record demonstrates that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred.…

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.