Maria Quevedo Garcia v. Eric H. Holder Jr. ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            SEP 01 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    MARIA ESPERANZA QUEVEDO                          No. 08-71501
    GARCIA,
    Agency No. A072-513-763
    Petitioner,
    v.                                             MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted August 10, 2010 **
    Before:        LEAVY, HAWKINS, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    Maria Esperanza Quevedo Garcia, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
    petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying
    her second motion to reopen. 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).
    We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Toufighi v.
    Mukasey, 
    538 F.3d 988
    , 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in
    part the petition for review.
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Quevedo Garcia’s motion to
    reopen as untimely because it was filed almost nine years after the BIA’s final
    order of removal and Quevedo Garcia failed to demonstrate that she qualified for
    any exceptions to the 90-day time deadline. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i); 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2
    (c)(3) (listing exceptions to the time limitation).
    We lack jurisdiction to review Quevedo Garcia’s contention that the BIA
    should have invoked its sua sponte authority to reopen her proceedings. See
    Ekimian v. INS, 
    303 F.3d 1153
    , 1159 (9th Cir. 2002).
    To the extent that Quevedo Garcia challenges the BIA’s October 16, 2007,
    decision denying her first motion to reopen, we lack jurisdiction because this
    petition for review is not timely as to that order. See 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    (b)(1); Singh
    v. INS, 
    315 F.3d 1186
    , 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
    2                                     08-71501
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-71501

Judges: Leavy, Hawkins, Ikuta

Filed Date: 9/1/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024