Thai Houg v. Holder
This text of 329 F. App'x 758 (Thai Houg 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
Thai Houg, a native and citizen of Cambodia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s decision not to invoke its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings. See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.2002). Houg’s due process contentions are not colorable. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).
Houg’s contention that the BIA should have assigned his appeal to a three-judge panel is unavailing. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(6).
In light of our disposition, we do not reach Houg’s remaining contention that the IJ deemed his motion timely.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED 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
329 F. App'x 758, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thai-houg-v-holder-ca9-2009.