Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

360 F. App'x 922

Rodriguez v. Holder

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided December 30, 2009

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2009-12-30

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Shobna Chandar Lata v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Anant Ram v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Singh v. Immigration & Naturalization Services

Decided 2009-12-30

¶1 MEMORANDUM

¶2 Jose Luis Correa Rodriguez and Fidela Maria Martinez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002), and review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for review.

¶3 The BIA acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence presented with the motion to reopen was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh, 295 F.3d at 1039 (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”). It follows that petitioners’ due process claim fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring error for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).

¶4 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

¶5 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

/360/fappx/922 · .json · Public domain