Perez-Suastes
Perez-Suastes v. Mukasey
Opinion
lead Opinion
*669 MEMORANDUM **
Raul Perez-Suastes (“Perez-Suastes”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, and we repeat them only to the extent necessary to understand our disposition. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b). We deny the petition for review and motion to stay the voluntary departure period.
Even assuming, as the BIA did, that Perez-Suastes stated new facts regarding two new medical conditions, he was required to demonstrate that the new evidence, when combined with the evidence presented at the original hearing, “would establish prima facie eligibility for the relief sought.” Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 984 (9th Cir.2005). The BIA “had discretion to assess the truth and sufficiency of the asserted facts without reopening proceedings for a hearing.” Hamid v. INS, 648 F.2d 635, 637 (9th Cir.1981). It did not abuse its discretion here in denying Perez-Suastes’s motion because he provided only one conclusory, general observation about work availability in Mexico in order to claim that removal would pose an…