Zeferino Araiza Flores v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 09 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZEFERINO ARAIZA FLORES, No. 09-73371
Petitioner, Agency No. A076-361-033
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Zeferino Araiza Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321
F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
To the extent we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Araiza
Flores’ motion to reopen, see Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir.
2006), we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the
evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening, see Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037,
1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is
“arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”).
Araiza Flores’ contention that the BIA abused its discretion under
Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), is without
merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-73371