Camacho

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of a motion to reopen a previous denial of an application for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b).

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

As to petitioners Pedro Lemus Camacho (A095-876-804) and Sandra Monica Lemus Magana (A095-876-807), the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen because the motion fails to address petitioners’ continued ineligibility for cancellation of removal. Pedro Lemus Camacho presented no evidence that he can overcome the bar to relief as someone convicted of a controlled substance violation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(C). Monica Lemus Magana presented no evidence that she now has a qualifying relative for purposes of cancellation of removal as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D). See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093-94 (9th Cir.2002).

As to Erika Lemus Magana (A095876-806), the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying her motion to reopen, which relies solely on her acquisition of a qualifying relative and failed…