Cardenas-Ricse

Cardenas-Ricse v. Mukasey

Good Law
303 F. App'x 484
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 15, 2008No. 08-72978California294 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

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

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

The regulations provide that “a party may file only one motion to reopen,” and that the motion “must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding sought to be reopened.” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred because it was petitioners’ second motion to reopen and was filed on May 5, 2008, more than 90 days after the August 18, 2005 final administrative decision. Accordingly, respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted in part because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision declining to exercise its sua sponte authority to…

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.