Yingying Lou v. Holder
This text of 331 F. App'x 541 (Yingying Lou 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
Yingying Lou, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Minasyan v. Mukasey, 553 F.3d 1224, 1229 (9th Cir.2009). We therefore dismiss Lou’s claim regarding the BIA’s sua sponte authority.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lou’s motion to reopen because it was untimely and Lou did not demonstrate that a regulatory exception applies, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3), or that equitable tolling applies, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir.2003). We therefore deny Lou’s claim regarding the BIA’s timeliness decision.
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
331 F. App'x 541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yingying-lou-v-holder-ca9-2009.