Fabio Cruz Torres v. Loretta E. Lynch , 632 F. App'x 375 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JAN 26 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    FABIO ORLANDO CRUZ TORRES,                       No. 13-73529
    AKA Orlando Flabio Cruz, AKA Flabio
    Nino,                                            Agency No. A200-709-702
    Petitioner,
    MEMORANDUM*
    v.
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted January 20, 2016**
    Before:        CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    Fabio Orlando Cruz Torres, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
    reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
    *
    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).
    review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Toufighi v.
    Mukasey, 
    538 F.3d 988
    , 992 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part
    the petition for review.
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Cruz Torres’ motion to
    reopen because it was untimely, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Cruz Torres
    failed to establish that any regulatory exception to the time limitation for filing a
    motion to reopen applied, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also 
    Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 992
    (court “defers to the Board’s exercise of discretion unless it acted
    arbitrarily, irrationally or contrary to law”).
    We lack jurisdiction to consider Cruz Torres’ contentions regarding relief
    under the Convention Against Torture because he did not raise them to the BIA.
    See Barron v. Ashcroft, 
    358 F.3d 674
    , 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner must exhaust
    claims in administrative proceedings below).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
    2                                     13-73529
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-73529

Citation Numbers: 632 F. App'x 375

Filed Date: 1/26/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023