Case ID: f-appx_414/html/0975-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Blanca Estela CAMPOS; David Esteban Campos-Vega, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-72235.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.
    
    Filed Feb. 22, 2011.
    
      Blanca Estela Campos, La Puente, CA, pro se.
    David Esteban Campos-Vega, La Puente, CA, pro se.
    Lisa Marie Arnold, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Blanca Estela Campos and David Esteban Campos-Vega, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying then- motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred where the successive motion was filed over 21 months after the BIA’s March 20, 2006, final removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish changed circumstances in Mexico to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and number filing limitations, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(h).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.