Case ID: f-appx_229/html/0558-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Martha Vidal MENDOZA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-71267.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2007.
    
    Filed April 24, 2007.
    Martha Vidal Mendoza, El Monte, CA, pro se.
    CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Daniel E. Goldman, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Martha Vidal Mendoza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of her motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen as untimely and for failure to demonstrate that her new evidence of a qualifying relative did not establish prima facie eligibility for cancellation of removal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) and (c); Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 984 (9th Cir.2005).

Petitioner’s motion to accept her late reply brief is granted. The Clerk shall file the reply brief received on February 9, 2007.

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.