Hernandez Ramirez v. Holder
This text of 325 F. App'x 530 (Hernandez Ramirez v. Holder) 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
Lead petitioner Octavio Hernandez Ramirez, 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, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Hernandez Ramirez’s second motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (an alien who is subject to a final order of removal is generally limited to filing one motion to reopen).
To the extent Hernandez Ramirez challenges the BIA’s August 4, 2005 and September 30, 2005 orders, we lack jurisdiction because this petition is not timely as to those orders. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir.2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
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
325 F. App'x 530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hernandez-ramirez-v-holder-ca9-2009.