Mkhaeil v. Holder , 382 F. App'x 659 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                           JUN 09 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    OSAMA ABDO MKHAEIL,                              No. 08-70705
    Petitioner,                       Agency No. A079-682-941
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted May 25, 2010 **
    Before:        CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    Osama Abdo Mkhaeil, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions pro se 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
    .
    *
    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).
    Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 
    321 F.3d 889
    , 894 (9th Cir.
    2003), we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
    We lack jurisdiction over Mkhaeil’s due process claims and his contentions
    regarding changed country conditions in Syria because he failed to exhaust these
    issues before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 
    358 F.3d 674
    , 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Mkhaeil’s motion to reopen
    because the motion was filed more than two and a half years after the BIA’s order
    dismissing his underlying appeal, and did not fall within any exception to the
    90-day filing limitation. See 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2
    (c)(2)-(3); see also Matter of
    Velarde-Pacheco, 
    23 I. & N. Dec. 253
    , 256 (BIA 2002) (motion to reopen to adjust
    status based on marriage to a U.S. citizen may be granted if, inter alia, the motion
    is timely filed).
    We do not consider Mkhaeil’s remaining contentions regarding the BIA’s
    December 8, 2004, order because these contentions were rejected in Mkhaeil v.
    Gonzales, 05-70096 (9th Cir. Feb. 26. 2007).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
    2                                      08-70705
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-70705

Citation Numbers: 382 F. App'x 659

Judges: Canby, Thomas, Fletcher

Filed Date: 6/9/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024