Nevarez

Nevarez v. Gonzales

Good Law
207 F. App'x 777
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2006Nos. 04-75914, 05-73877California418 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Herminio Nevarez Nevarez and Aracely Y. Nevarez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent that we have jurisdic *778 tion, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider. Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). We deny in part; dismiss in part; and grant in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than two months after the 90 day time limit had expired. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2) (a motion to reopen before the BIA must be filed within 90 days of the final administrative decision); Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (this court will reverse a denial of a motion to reopen only if arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law).

Petitioners have waived any challenge to the BIA’s underlying order denying their applications for cancellation of removal by fading to raise any arguments in their opening brief challenging that…

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.