Mohamed v. Garland

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 25 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOHAMED ABDULKADIR No. 22-2003 MOHAMED, Agency No. A071-714-251 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 12, 2023** Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Mohamed Abdulkadir Mohamed, a native and citizen of Somalia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Mohamed’s request for oral argument is denied. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Mohamed’s motion to reopen as untimely, where it was filed over sixteen months after the final removal order, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within ninety days of final removal order), and petitioner has not established that equitable tolling of the filing deadline is warranted, see Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) (deadline may be equitably tolled when petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, and petitioner acts with due diligence in discovering such circumstances). The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues. The supplemented motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 22-2003