Angel Cano v. Holder

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 05 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANTIAGO ANGEL CANO, No. 06-71161
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-310-911
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 20, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Santiago Angel Cano, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se 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. We review for abuse of
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785,
*
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).
791–92 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Angel Cano’s motion to
reopen as untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). 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 Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.
2002); see also Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 824 (9th Cir. 2011)
(“No significant changes have occurred since Ekimian that would allow this panel
to find a sufficiently meaningful standard, and allow us to review sua sponte
reopening.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 06-71161