Case ID: f-appx_361/html/0861-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Angela MENDOZA JIMENEZ; Hugo Mendoza, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-72165.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
    
    Filed Jan. 8, 2010.
    Claudia Jasmine Lopez, Esquire, Law Offices of Mendez & Lopez, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.
    Leah V. Durant, Esquire, Susan Houser, Luis E. Perez, Senior Litigation Counsel, Linda S. Wendtland, Esquire, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Angela Mendoza Jimenez and her son, Hugo Mendoza, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal pro-eeedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Ochoa-Amaya v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 989, 992 (9th Cir.2007), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen where petitioners did not demonstrate prima facie eligibility for adjustment of status because their priority date was not current. See id. at 992-93.

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