Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8623660
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Martinez v. Gonzales
No. 8623660 · Decided July 31, 2006
No. 8623660·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
July 31, 2006
Citation
No. 8623660
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Ines Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen its earlier decision adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s denial of her application for cancellation of removal. We deny the petition for review. The Board in construing Martinez’s motion as one for reconsideration did not abuse its discretion in denying relief because Martinez failed to demonstrate any errors of fact or law in the Board’s earlier decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (b). The Board also acted within its discretion in denying Martinez’s motion to reopen because Martinez failed to support the motion with new or previously unavailable evidentiary material. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.2 (a) and (c); Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 984 (9th Cir.2005). 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 ** Ines Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen its earlier decision adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s denial
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Ines Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen its earlier decision adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s denial
02The Board in construing Martinez’s motion as one for reconsideration did not abuse its discretion in denying relief because Martinez failed to demonstrate any errors of fact or law in the Board’s earlier decision.
03The Board also acted within its discretion in denying Martinez’s motion to reopen because Martinez failed to support the motion with new or previously unavailable evidentiary material.
04This 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.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Ines Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen its earlier decision adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s denial
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Martinez v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on July 31, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8623660 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.