Valdivia v. Holder

348 F. App'x 304
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided October 13, 2009·No. No. 08-72641·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Covarrubias Valdivia and Ericka Tapia Ramirez, husband and wife, seek review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the Board’s denial of petitioners’ motion to reopen, which introduced further evidence of hardship to their United States citizen son. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 (9th Cir.2006) (explaining that § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars jurisdiction where question presented in motion to reopen is essentially the same unreviewable discretionary issue originally decided).

Our conclusion that we lack jurisdiction to review the Board’s denial of reopening forecloses petitioner’s argument that the Board denied failed to meaningfully review and analyze the issues raised in the motion. See Fernandez, 439 F.3d at 603-04.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Valdivia v. Holder, 348 F. App'x 304 (9th Cir. 2009).

348 F. App'x 304 (Valdivia v. Holder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related