Sanchez-Escobar v. Mukasey
This text of 302 F. App'x 638 (Sanchez-Escobar v. Mukasey) 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
Citalli Bernice Sanchez-Escobar, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for [639]*639review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Celis-Castellano v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 888, 890 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Sanchez-Escobar’s motion to reopen because the doctor’s note she provided was insufficient to establish “exceptional circumstances.” See id. at 892.
Sanchez-Escobar’s contention regarding her filing of a Temporary Protected Status application is unavailing.
We do not consider the evidence Sanchez-Escobar presented with her opening brief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
302 F. App'x 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanchez-escobar-v-mukasey-ca9-2008.