Valdez-Salazar v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
This text of 56 F. App'x 389 (Valdez-Salazar v. Immigration & Naturalization Service) 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
Damario Valdez-Salazar, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motions to reopen deportation proceedings to apply for adjustment of status. Because the transitional rules apply, see Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147,1150 (9th Cir.1997), we have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial a motion to reopen, Sharma v. INS, 89 F.3d 545, 547 (9th Cir.1996), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA properly denied Valdez-Salazar’s motions to reopen as untimely, see 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(2), because the record indicates that the BIA mailed its decision to Valdez-Salazar’s address of record, see Lee v. INS, 685 F.2d 343, 344 (9th Cir. 1982) (finding the BIA had complied with the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(f) by mailing a copy of its'decision to the petitioner’s address of record).
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 F. App'x 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdez-salazar-v-immigration-naturalization-service-ca9-2003.