Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630623
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Rodriguez-Oropeza v. Gonzales
No. 8630623 · Decided April 24, 2007
No. 8630623·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 24, 2007
Citation
No. 8630623
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Angel Ruben Rodriguez-Oropeza and Claudia Leticia Betancourt de Rodri *566 guez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to reopen, because the BIA considered the evidence the petitioners submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility for cancellation of removal. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (The BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.”). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Angel Ruben Rodriguez-Oropeza and Claudia Leticia Betancourt de Rodri *566 guez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Jose Angel Ruben Rodriguez-Oropeza and Claudia Leticia Betancourt de Rodri *566 guez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
02We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen.
03The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to reopen, because the BIA considered the evidence the petitioners submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish pri
04INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (The BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.”).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Angel Ruben Rodriguez-Oropeza and Claudia Leticia Betancourt de Rodri *566 guez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Rodriguez-Oropeza v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 24, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630623 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.