Ortiz-Ventura

Ortiz-Ventura v. Holder

Good Law
346 F. App'x 234
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 28, 2009No. 07-73252California331 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Francisco Alejandro Ortiz-Ventura, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Ortiz-Ventura’s motion to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than 23 months after the BIA’s March 31, 2005 order dismissing the underlying appeal, and Ortiz-Ventura failed to establish that an exception to the 90-day filing deadline applied. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2) — (3); cf. Cardoso-Tlaseca v. Gonzales, 460 F.3d 1102, 1107 (9th Cir.2006) ( 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (d) did not bar BIA from considering removed alien’s timely motion to reopen where vacated conviction was “key part” of removal proceeding); Wiedersperg v. INS, 896 F.2d 1179, 1181-82 (9th Cir.1990) (former 8 C.F.R. § 3.2 and 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c) did not bar BIA from reopening where deported alien’s subsequently…

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.