Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8645278
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Ahamed v. Mukasey
No. 8645278 · Decided November 19, 2007
No. 8645278·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
November 19, 2007
Citation
No. 8645278
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Rakib Ahamed petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to reopen. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. See Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen because the motion to reopen was untimely and number-barred, and did not meet any of the regulatory exceptions. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), (3); Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002). Accordingly, respondent’s unopposed 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). All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Rakib Ahamed petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to reopen.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Rakib Ahamed petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to reopen.
02We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion.
03The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen because the motion to reopen was untimely and number-barred, and did not meet any of the regulatory exceptions.
04Accordingly, respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Rakib Ahamed petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to reopen.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Ahamed v. Mukasey in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on November 19, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8645278 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.