U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2010

Rafael Verduzco Partida v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided September 27, 2010 · Silverman, Callahan, Smith

397 F. App'x 341

Counsel

Raul Gomez, Esquire, Law Office of Raul Gomez, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners., Susan Bennett Green, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rafael Verduzco Partida and family, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 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.

The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely petitioners’ motion to reopen because it was filed more than 90 days after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish that they were entitled to equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (deadline for filing a motion to reopen can be equitably tolled where a petitioner acts with due diligence).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.