Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0520-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gerardo NUNEZ-FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 14-72784
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted October 25, 2016 
    
    Filed November 3, 2016
    Gerardo Nunez-Fernandez, Pro Se, San Bernardino, CA, for Petitioner.
    Anthony W. Norwood, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gerardo Nunez-Fernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 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. We review de novo questions of law. Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

We generally lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision not to reopen proceedings sua sponte, but retain limited jurisdiction to review for legal or constitutional error. Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011); Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 589 (9th Cir. 2016). Nunez-Femandez’s contention that it is unclear whether the BIA used the proper legal framework is not supported by the record, where the BIA stated the “exceptional circumstance” standard and cited pertinent legal authority. See Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.