Nammo
Nammo v. Mukasey
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Arkan Yonan Nammo, a native and citizen of Iraq, petitions for review of the *735 Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings and to reconsider its March 1, 2006 order. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen or to reconsider for an abuse of discretion, see Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Nammo failed to establish an error of fact or law in its March 1, 2006 order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (b)(1); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176 , 1180 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). Nammo was provided an opportunity to explain the basis for the IJ’s finding that Nammo submitted a frivolous asylum application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (d)(6); 8 C.F.R. § 208.20 ; cf. Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1157-58 (9th Cir.2003) (setting forth criteria for finding an application frivolous). We lack jurisdiction to review Nammo’s contention that the IJ “intimidated and mentally punished” Nammo because he did not raise it before…