Cadena v. Mukasey

Ninth Circuit

Cadena v. Mukasey

291 F. App'x 856

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 10, 2008

DocketNo. 05-77228

StatusPublished

This text of 291 F. App'x 856 (Cadena v. Mukasey) 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.

Bluebook

Cadena v. Mukasey, 291 F. App'x 856 (9th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

[857]*857Juan Manuel Godinez Cadena, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision ordering him removed and denying his request to administratively close proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review questions of law de novo, Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny the petition.

The BIA correctly affirmed the IJ’s denial of petitioner’s request for administrative closure where the government declined to consent to the closure of the case. See In Re Gutierrez-Lopez, 21 I. & N. Dec. 479, 480 (BIA 1996) (“A case may not be administratively closed if opposed by either of the parties”).

Petitioner’s requests for decision are denied as moot.

PETITION 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

MEMORANDUM

**

[857]*857Juan Manuel Godinez Cadena, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision ordering him removed and denying his request to administratively close proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review questions of law de novo, Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny the petition.

The BIA correctly affirmed the IJ’s denial of petitioner’s request for administrative closure where the government declined to consent to the closure of the case. See In Re Gutierrez-Lopez, 21 I. & N. Dec. 479, 480 (BIA 1996) (“A case may not be administratively closed if opposed by either of the parties”).

Petitioner’s requests for decision are denied as moot.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 F. App'x 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cadena-v-mukasey-ca9-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack