Alcala

Alcala v. Mukasey

Good Law
256 F. App'x 152
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 26, 2007No. 06-75714California221 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Alberto Orozco Alcala and Estela Garcia, natives and citizens of Mexico, pe *153 tition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying their motion to reopen the underlying denial of their application for cancellation of removal. The BIA concluded that the motion was untimely under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2).

Petitioners contend that the time bar should not prevent consideration of their motion because they have established an exception to the time bar by demonstrating that there are changed country conditions in Mexico giving rise to their prima facie eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture.

The BIA acted within its discretion in concluding that petitioners’ motion to reopen was untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c). For the reasons stated by the BIA in its order denying the motion, we agree that petitioners failed to establish an exception to the bar, because petitioners failed to present material evidence of changed country conditions in Mexico. See Konstantinova v. INS, 195 F.3d 528, 530 (9th Cir.1999) (upholding denial of motion to reopen where petitioner introduced evidence that was too general in nature to…

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.