Case ID: f-appx_177/html/0544-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Leticia Flores ORTEGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 04-75483.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 5, 2006.
    
    Filed April 10, 2006.
    
      Leticia Flores Ortega, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
    Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Stacy S. Paddack, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Leticia Flores Ortega, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reconsider its decision dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying her cancellation of removal application. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002). We deny the petition for review.

A motion to reconsider must be filed no later than 30 days after the final administrative decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(2). Flores Ortega filed her motion to reconsider on August 23, 2004, nearly seven months after the BIA issued its final decision. The BIA denied the motion on the sole basis that it was untimely, and Flores Ortega fails to challenge that determination. She has therefore waived the only issue before the court. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996).

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.