Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630687
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Ramirez Salazar v. Gonzales
No. 8630687 · Decided April 27, 2007
No. 8630687·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 27, 2007
Citation
No. 8630687
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Noe Ramirez Salazar seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review. The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Ramirez Salazar’s motion to reopen to apply for protection under the Convention Against Torture because it was filed nearly one year after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of final administrative removal order), and he failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Mexico, see 8 C.F.R. § 208.16 (c)(2). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Noe Ramirez Salazar seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Noe Ramirez Salazar seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
02INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.
03The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Ramirez Salazar’s motion to reopen to apply for protection under the Convention Against Torture because it was filed nearly one year after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 U.S.C
04§ 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of final administrative removal order), and he failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Mexico, see 8 C.F.R.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Noe Ramirez Salazar seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Ramirez Salazar v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 27, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630687 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.