Joshi v. Holder
This text of 367 F. App'x 859 (Joshi 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 **
Minton Lai Joshi, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004), amended by 404 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Joshi’s third motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred where the motion was filed more than two years after the BIA’s final administrative order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).
This court lacks jurisdiction over Joshi’s contention that the filing deadline should have been equitably tolled because he failed to raise it to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (the court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).
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
367 F. App'x 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joshi-v-holder-ca9-2010.