Herrera v. Mukasey

MEMORANDUM ** Petitioners’ motion for in forma pauperis status is granted. This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioners’ motion to reopen removal proceedings. We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). The regulations provide that “a party may file only one motion to reopen.... ” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). Therefore, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ third motion to reopen as numerically barred. See id,.; see also Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 894-97 . Accordingly, respondent’s 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) (stating standard). The motion for stay of voluntary departure, filed after the departure period had expired, is denied. See Garcia v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir.2004). 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.