Artemio Mendez-Lopez v. Eric H. Holder Jr.
This text of 471 F. App'x 702 (Artemio Mendez-Lopez v. Eric H. Holder Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Artemio Mendez-Lopez and Otilia Martinez-Geminiano, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders denying their motions to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law. Granados-Oseguera v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 1011, 1014 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). We deny the petitions for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ untimely motions to reopen where petitioners failed to depart the United States during their voluntary departure period, and were therefore statutorily ineligible for the relief requested. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(l); Granados-Oseguera, 546 F.3d at 1016 (statutory bar to relief resulting from failure to voluntarily depart is not subject to an exception in cases involving ineffective assistance of counsel).
In light of our disposition, we need not reach petitioners’ remaining contentions.
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
471 F. App'x 702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/artemio-mendez-lopez-v-eric-h-holder-jr-ca9-2012.