Demos

MEMORANDUM **

Demos first argues that the Board violated due process by failing to inform him that, in the event he changed his address during the pendency of his appeal to the Board, he was required to complete and submit to the Board a form giving notice of the change. We review Demos’s argument of a due process violation de novo. Khup v. Ashcroft, 376 F.3d 898, 902 (9th Cir.2004).

Here, the Immigration Judge ordered Demos excluded on September 26, 1994. Demos appealed the exclusion order to the Board, which dismissed the appeal on February 7, 2000. More than three years later, Demos filed a motion to reopen and reissue the decision. He attached to the motion a declaration indicating that “[f]rom about the end of 1998 until April 2000” he maintained an address on Redmond Way in Redmond, Washington; that in April 2000 he moved to another address in Redmond; that from the time he filed his appeal to the Board until his detainment on September 30, 2003, he reported his current address on employment and travel authorization forms that he submitted to the former Immigration and Naturalization Service; and, finally, that as of October 20, 2003, he had “not received written notice”…