Zaman

Zaman v. Gonzales

Good Law
205 F. App'x 558
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 2006No. 04-76225California294 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Sayed Shah Zaman, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s (“U”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings in which he was ordered removed in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002), we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Zaman failed to meet his burden of demonstrating circumstances serious enough to be “exceptional” in order to excuse his absence from his scheduled removal hearing. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1). We held in Sharma v. INS, 89 F.3d 545 (9th Cir.1996), cited by the IJ, that “traffic difficulties do not qualify as exceptional circumstances beyond Petitioners’ control.” Id. at 547 . Here, the agency acted within its discretion in applying Sharma to conclude that Zaman’s car trouble on the day before his hearing did not justify his absence.

Zaman also contends that he was never given an oral warning of the consequences of failure to appear, but the Notice to Appear in the…

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.