Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10339078
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Petrache v. Bondi
No. 10339078 · Decided February 25, 2025
No. 10339078·Ninth Circuit · 2025·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
February 25, 2025
Citation
No. 10339078
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HORTENSIA PETRACHE, No. 21-417
Agency No.
Petitioner, A200-231-921
v.
MEMORANDUM*
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 18, 2025**
Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
Hortensia Petrache, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily dismissing
her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the
*
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).
petition for review and remand.
While this petition was pending, the BIA overruled its longstanding position
that the notice of appeal deadline in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.38(b) is jurisdictional and
held that the deadline is subject to equitable tolling if a noncitizen establishes that
they have been “pursuing their rights diligently” and that “some extraordinary
circumstance prevented timely filing.” Matter of Morales-Morales, 28 I. & N.
Dec. 714, 716-17 (BIA 2023). The BIA has not yet considered whether Petrache
can establish that equitably tolling should apply. We therefore remand for the BIA
to consider equitable tolling in the first instance. See INS v. Orlando Ventura, 537
U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002); see also Vasquez-Rodriguez v. Garland, 7 F.4th 888, 896
(9th Cir. 2021) (exhaustion not required where resort to the agency would be
futile).
The motion for a stay of removal is granted. The stay of removal remains in
place until the mandate issues.
Each party must bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 21-417
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2025 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HORTENSIA PETRACHE, No.
03On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 18, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
04Hortensia Petrache, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her motion to reopen removal pr
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Petrache v. Bondi in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on February 25, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10339078 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.