Rodriguez v. Gonzales
This text of 164 F. App'x 568 (Rodriguez v. Gonzales) 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
Crispin Jimenez Rodriguez, 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 review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its broad discretion in denying Jimenez Rodriguez’s motion to reopen based on new evidence of a qualifying relative because Jimenez Rodriguez failed to present evidence the relative would suffer the requisite hardship. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a); Ordonez, 345 F.3d at 785 (holding that prima facie eligibility is demonstrated by a showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied).
Jimenez Rodriguez has also failed to raise a colorable due process claim. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit 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
164 F. App'x 568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-gonzales-ca9-2006.