Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8627198
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Rodriguez v. Gonzales
No. 8627198 · Decided December 27, 2006
No. 8627198·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 27, 2006
Citation
No. 8627198
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Tania K. Espinosa Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, see Iturribari a v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen as untimely, because she did not file the motion within 90 days of the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and did not demonstrate a material change in circumstances in Mexico, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (e)(3)(ii). Petitioner’s reliance on Khourassany v. INS, 208 F.3d 1096 , 1099 & n. 2 (9th Cir.2000) is misplaced. In that case, the 90-day time limit for motions to reopen did not apply because petitioner had been ordered deported before March 22, 1999. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18 (b)(2). 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
Espinosa Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
01Espinosa Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings.
02The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen as untimely, because she did not file the motion within 90 days of the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R.
03§ 1003.2 (c)(2), and did not demonstrate a material change in circumstances in Mexico, see 8 C.F.R.
04In that case, the 90-day time limit for motions to reopen did not apply because petitioner had been ordered deported before March 22, 1999.
Frequently Asked Questions
Espinosa Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Rodriguez v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 27, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8627198 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.