Joel Rivera-Gomez v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 439 F. App'x 576 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 22 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOEL RIVERA-GOMEZ, No. 09-73815
Petitioner, Agency No. A078-751-381
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Joel Rivera-Gomez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings
conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Singh v. Gonzales, 491
F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Rivera-Gomez’s motion
to reopen because the motion was filed more than five years after the IJ’s March
14, 2002, removal order, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(i), and Rivera-Gomez
failed to establish that he lacked notice, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii), or
establish grounds for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897-
98 (9th Cir. 2003) (equitable tolling is available “when a petitioner is prevented
from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with
due diligence”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-73815