Case ID: f-appx_355/html/1001-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Maria Socorro AGASINO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-71468.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Dec. 8, 2009.
    
    Filed Dec. 10, 2009.
    Philippe Dwelshauvers, Esquire, Fresno, CA, Nancy Ellen Miller, Esquire, Law Offices of Reeves & Associates, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Alison Drucker, Esquire, Donald E. Keener, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Maria Socorro Agasino (Agasino) petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision denying her petition to reopen her case to seek relief pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c).

Agasino raised the argument that retroactive application of the expanded “aggravated felony” definition violates due process in her prior petition, so it is now barred by the doctrine of issue preclusion. See In re Reynoso, 477 F.3d 1117, 1122 (9th Cir.2007). Likewise, Agasino could have raised her claim that application of the expanded definition violates her right to equal protection, so that claim is barried by the doctrine of claim preclusion. See United States v. Bhatia, 545 F.3d 757, 759 (9th Cir.2008). Because Agasino is not entitled to relief, the BIA acted within its discretion when it denied Agasino’s motion to reopen proceedings. See Bunty Ngaeth v. Mukasey, 545 F.3d 796, 799-800 (9th Cir.2008).

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