Castaneda

Castaneda v. Mukasey

Good Law
256 F. App'x 940
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 27, 2007No. 07-72335California378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioners’ motion to reopen.

The BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002). The BIA did not abuse *942 its discretion in denying the motion to reopen with respect to petitioner, Silvia Mendoza, A# 96-351-388, because petitioner failed to maintain the requisite ten years of continuous physical presence as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) because she departed from the United States for a period in excess of 90 days and is statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal relief.

Further, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen with respect to petitioner Maria Larisa Mendoza-Alvarez, A# 96-351-389, because petitioner does not have a qualifying relative as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D) and is also statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal relief. See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093-94 (9th Cir.2002).

Respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted with respect to petitioners, Silvia Mendoza and Maria Larisa Mendoza-Alvarez,…

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.