Salazar

Salazar v. Mukasey

Good Law
261 F. App'x 973
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 2007No. 06-71327California249 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rafael Ramirez Salazar petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

The evidence Ramirez Salazar presented with his motion to reopen concerned the same hardship grounds as his application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 602-03 (9th Cir.2006). We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that the evidence would not alter its prior discretionary determination that he failed to establish the requisite hardship. See id. at 600 (holding that 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B)(i) bars this court from reviewing the denial of a motion to reopen “where the question presented is essentially the same discretionary [hardship] issue originally decided.”).

In his opening brief, Ramirez Salazar does not challenge the BIA’s determination that his motion was untimely to the…

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.