Alvarado
Alvarado v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Sotero Alvarado and Vianey Alvarado, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their second motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ second motion to reopen because it was untimely and numerically barred, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish changed country conditions in Mexico that are material to petitioners and them circumstances. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir.2008) (requiring movant to produce previously unavailable evidence of changed country conditions that are material and establish prima facie eligibility for relief); see also Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151-52 (rejecting as particular social group “returning Mexicans from the United States”).
To the extent petitioners challenge the BIA’s March 8, 2005, order denying petitioners cancellation of…