Roeli Cal Carreto v. Loretta E. Lynch

648 F. App'x 703
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedApril 18, 2016
Docket15-70045
StatusUnpublished

This text of 648 F. App'x 703 (Roeli Cal Carreto v. Loretta E. Lynch) 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
Roeli Cal Carreto v. Loretta E. Lynch, 648 F. App'x 703 (9th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Norma Cristina Cal and Roeli Galindo Cal Carreto, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Narjmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir.2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to reopen, where petitioners did not establish that exceptional circumstances excused their failure to appear at their hearing. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1) (defining exceptional circumstances as circumstances beyond the control of the alien, including battery, extreme cruelty, death, or serious illness of the alien or their immediate relatives, but not less compelling circumstances).

We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ March 8, 2016, request for prosecuto-rial discretion. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir.2012) (order).

To the extent petitioners contend they are eligible for relief, we need not reach this remaining contention in light of our disposition.

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

Luis Vilchiz-Soto v. Eric Holder, Jr.
688 F.3d 642 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Najmabadi v. Holder
597 F.3d 983 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
648 F. App'x 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roeli-cal-carreto-v-loretta-e-lynch-ca9-2016.