Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Lilia HEREDIA-SANTANA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM

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

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying petitioner's second motion to reopen removal proceedings.

Respondent's motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The regulations provide that only one motion to reopen removal proceedings may be filed with the BIA. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). This was petitioner's second motion to reopen removal proceedings. Therefore, the BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioner's second motion to reopen. See Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir. 2004), amended by 404 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2005) (holding that BIA denials of motions to reopen or reconsider are reviewed for abuse of discretion).

Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.

All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HEREDIA-SANTANA v. MUKASEY
(Jul 22, 2008)