Victor Vargas-Placarte v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           SEP 18 2012
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    VICTOR MANUEL VARGAS-                             No. 10-73508
    PLANCARTE,
    Agency No. A093-178-451
    Petitioner,
    v.                                              MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted September 10, 2012 **
    Before:        WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Victor Manuel Vargas-Plancarte, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
    for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
    motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing de
    *
    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).
    novo questions of law, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 
    400 F.3d 785
    , 791-92 (9th Cir.
    2005), we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
    The BIA properly concluded that Vargas-Plancarte was ineligible for
    suspension of deportation at the time he pled guilty to a violation of California
    Health & Safety Code § 11352. See 8 U.S.C. § 1254(a)(2) (repealed); cf. Lopez-
    Castellanos v. Gonzales, 
    437 F.3d 848
    , 852-54 (9th Cir. 2006) (repeal of
    suspension of deportation relief did not apply retroactively to alien where the
    offense to which he pled guilty would not have rendered him ineligible for
    suspension of deportation at the time of his guilty plea). In light of this
    determination, the BIA did not err by declining to address whether Vargas-
    Plancarte was entitled to equitable tolling of his untimely motion to reopen.
    We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua
    sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Mejia-
    Hernandez v. Holder, 
    633 F.3d 818
    , 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
    2                                      10-73508
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-73508

Judges: Wardlaw, Clifton, Smith

Filed Date: 9/18/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024