Flores

Flores v. Mukasey

Good Law
260 F. App'x 963
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 21, 2007No. 07-72588California208 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

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

Respondent’s motion to dismiss is construed as a motion for summary disposition. So construed, the motion is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The regulations provide that “a party may file only one motion to reopen,” and that the motion “must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding sought to be reopened.” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen, filed more than seven months after final administrative decision was rendered. See Iturribarria v. *964 INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.

All other pending motions are denied as moot.

The temporary stay of removal shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for…

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.