Vardan Petrosyan v. Eric H. Holder Jr. , 408 F. App'x 35 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           JAN 06 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    VARDAN PETROSYAN; et al.,                          No. 08-74335
    Petitioners,                        Agency Nos. A076-357-482
    A076-357-483
    v.                                                           A076-357-484
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    MEMORANDUM *
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted December 14, 2010 **
    Before:        GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    Vardan Petrosyan and family, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion
    to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction
    *
    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).
    pursuant to 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Singh v. Gonzales,
    
    491 F.3d 1090
    , 1095 (9th Cir. 2007), we deny in part and grant in part the petition
    for review.
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
    reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than six years after the
    BIA’s June 11, 2002, order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2
    (c)(2) (motion to reopen must generally be filed within 90 days of the final
    administrative order), and petitioners failed to establish grounds for equitable
    tolling, see Singh, 
    491 F.3d at 1096-97
    .
    Because the BIA failed to address petitioners’ request that the BIA exercise
    its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings, we remand for the BIA to consider
    petitioners’ request in the first instance. See Montes-Lopez v. Gonzales, 
    486 F.3d 1163
    , 1165 (9th Cir. 2007).
    Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
    REMANDED.
    2                                       08-74335
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-74335

Citation Numbers: 408 F. App'x 35

Judges: Goodwin, Thomas, Wallace

Filed Date: 1/6/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023