Arcenio Zarate-Alcantara v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 447 F. App'x 767 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 9 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARCENIO TOMAS ZARATE- No. 10-71686
ALCANTARA,
Agency No. A072-143-685
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 2, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Arcenio Tomas Zarate-Alcantara, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
reopen deportation proceedings held in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of motions to
*
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).
reopen. Garcia v. INS, 222 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir. 2000) (per curiam). We
deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Zarate-Alcantara’ motion to
reopen because Zarate-Alcantara was accompanied by counsel to his hearing where
counsel received both oral and written notice of Zarate-Alcantara’s next scheduled
hearing. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(a)(2), (c)(1) (1995); Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037,
1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is
“arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.”).
We lack jurisdiction to review Zarate-Alcantara’s contention that a Spanish
version of his notice of hearing should have been issued under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252b(a)(3) (1995) because he failed to raise that issue before the BIA. See
Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (explaining that this court
lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 10-71686