Mendez

Mendez v. Mukasey

Good Law
278 F. App'x 786
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 16, 2008No. 07-74906California339 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*787 MEMORANDUM **

Petitioners Herberto Nava Mendez and Alicia Nava Reveles petition this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) November 20, 2007 order denying their motion to reopen as untimely filed.

We have reviewed the record and petitioners’ response to this court’s March 31, 2008 order to show cause. We conclude that summary disposition is appropriate 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).

Specifically, the regulations provide that a motion to reopen must be filed with the BIA within ninety days after the mailing of the BIA’s decision. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). In this case, the record reflects that petitioners’ motion to reopen was filed with the BIA on June 28, 2007, 92 days after the BIA’s March 28, 2007 order dismissing petitioners’ appeal. Therefore, the BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioners’ untimely motion to reconsider. See Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004), amended by 404 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir.2005).

Petitioners allege that the BIA received their…

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.