Bernardo Morales Guadarrama v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Bernardo Morales Guadarrama v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 411 F. App'x 992 (9th Cir. 2011)

Bernardo Morales Guadarrama v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Bernardo Morales Guadarrama and Yolanda Morales, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo due process claims. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen where petitioners failed to demonstrate that evidence of Morales Guadarrama’s medical conditions was previously unavailable. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c); Romero-Ruiz v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1057, 1063-64 (9th Cir. 2008).

The evidence petitioners presented regarding their son’s psychological condition with their motion to reopen concerned the same basic hardship grounds as their application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 602-03 (9th Cir. 2006). We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that the evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of hardship. See id. at 601.

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA failed to consider evidence of hardship to their U.S. citizen daughter is not supported by the record.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

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

Reference

Full Case Name
Bernardo Morales GUADARRAMA; Yolanda Morales, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Status
Unpublished