Zeferino Araiza Flores v. Eric Holder, Jr.

420 F. App'x 680
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 9, 2011
Docket09-73371
StatusUnpublished

This text of 420 F. App'x 680 (Zeferino Araiza Flores v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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.

Bluebook
Zeferino Araiza Flores v. Eric Holder, Jr., 420 F. App'x 680 (9th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Zeferino Araiza Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his 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, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

To the extent we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Araiza Flores’ motion to reopen, see Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir.2006), we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening, see Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”).

Araiza Flores’ contention that the BIA abused its discretion under Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), is without merit.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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

Bluebook (online)
420 F. App'x 680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeferino-araiza-flores-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2011.