Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8646399
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Sanchez-Martinez v. Mukasey
No. 8646399 · Decided December 21, 2007
No. 8646399·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 21, 2007
Citation
No. 8646399
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s motion to reopen as untimely. Respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The regulations provide that a motion to reopen must be filed with the BIA within ninety days after the mailing of the BIA’s decision. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). Here, petitioner’s motion was filed more than two years after mailing of the BIA’s decision. Therefore, the BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioner’s untimely motion to reconsider. See Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004), amended by 404 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that BIA denials of motions to reopen or reconsider are reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied. All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal *953 shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate. 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 ** This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s motion to reopen as untimely.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s motion to reopen as untimely.
02Respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.