Zet v. Holder , 430 F. App'x 634 ( 2011 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAY 04 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
REINA RAFAELA ZET, No. 07-71844
Petitioner, Agency No. A073-914-645
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 2, 2011**
Pasadena, California
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reina Rafaela Zet, native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying her motion to reopen
proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the
denial of a motion to reopen for an abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321
*
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).
-2-
F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition
for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying Zet’s motion to reopen
because it was filed more than ninety days after the BIA’s final deportation order,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Zet has not identified any exceptions to the
ninety-day time limitation that apply, see id. §1003.2(c)(3).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua
sponte authority to reopen deportation proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a).
See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir. 2002) (noting that “the decision
of the BIA whether to invoke its sua sponte authority is committed to its unfettered
discretion”) (emphasis omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.