Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8626314
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Alvarado v. Gonzales
No. 8626314 · Decided December 1, 2006
No. 8626314·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 1, 2006
Citation
No. 8626314
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioners’ motion to reopen re *605 moval proceedings. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ second motion to reopen because the motion to reopen was numerically 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) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen is reviewed for abuse of discretion). 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 may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioners’ motion to reopen re *605 moval proceedings.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioners’ motion to reopen re *605 moval proceedings.
02The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ second motion to reopen because the motion to reopen was numerically barred and did not meet any of the regulatory exceptions.
03INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen is reviewed for abuse of discretion).
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 ** This is a petition for review from the denial of petitioners’ motion to reopen re *605 moval proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Alvarado v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 1, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8626314 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.