Miguel Castro-Gomez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
This text of 423 F. App'x 715 (Miguel Castro-Gomez v. Eric 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 **
Miguel Castro-Gomez, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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, Iturribarria, v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Castro-Gomez’s motion to reopen because the motion was filed more than four years after the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Castro-Gomez did not establish that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the time limitation, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897; see also Singh v. INS, 213 F.3d 1050, 1054 n. 8 (9th Cir.2000) (statements in motions are not evidence and are therefore not entitled to evidentiary weight).
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
423 F. App'x 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miguel-castro-gomez-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2011.