Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

372 F. App'x 703

Haridy v. Holder

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided March 24, 2010

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2010-03-24

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

Relies on Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Singh v. Immigration & Naturalization Services · Carlos Humberto Ordonez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Decided 2010-03-24

¶1 MEMORANDUM

¶2 Moustafa El Sayed Haridy, a native of Saudi Arabia and citizen of Egypt, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition.

¶3 The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Haridy’s motion to reopen because Haridy did not show prima facie eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. See INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 104-05, 108 S.Ct. 904, 99 L.Ed.2d 90 (1988) (the BIA may deny a motion to reopen for failure to establish a prima facie case for the underlying relief sought); see also Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”).

¶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.

/372/fappx/703 · .json · Public domain