Garen Shameyan v. Loretta E. Lynch
Garen Shameyan v. Loretta E. Lynch
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Garen Shameyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) denial of his motion to reconsider and reopen.
Shameyan’s only argument on appeal— that the BIA erred in not reopening his case in light of our decision in Quintero-Solazar v. Keisler, 506 F.3d 688 (9th Cir. 2007)—involves an exercise of the BIA’s sua sponte authority. 1 See In re G-D-, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1132, 1135 (BIA 1999). Sham-eyan does not claim that the BIA made any legal or constitutional error, cf. Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016), and we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision not to reopen proceedings sua sponte, see Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
. Shameyan waived his claims that the BIA erred in rejecting Dr. Jasmine Tehrani’s psychological evaluation, and that the BIA erred in reaffirming its prior decision denying equitable tolling. See Martinez-Serrano v. I.N.S., 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.