Case ID: f-appx_114/html/0873-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Xiangru LIU, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-72415.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
    
    Decided Dec. 10, 2004.
    Xiangru Liu, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Paul Fiorino, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Offiee of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Xiangru Liu, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings to seek adjustment of status. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, but review purely legal questions de novo. Singh v. Ashcroft, 867 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir.2004). We deny the petition for review.

The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen because she failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that her marriage was bona fide. See Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 994 (9th Cir.2003).

Moreover, Liu failed to demonstrate that the Board denied her due process in adjudicating her motion to reopen, or that any such denial of rights caused her prejudice. See Hartooni v. INS, 21 F.3d 336, 340 (9th Cir.1994).

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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.