Case ID: f-appx_344/html/0330-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Manvel HAKOBYAN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-71203.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 20, 2009.
    
    Filed Aug. 31, 2009.
    Alexander Morales, Boghosian & Morales, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner.
    CAC-District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Le-fevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Anthony P. Nicastro, David V. Bernal, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Manvel Hakobyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Hakobyan’s motion as untimely because the motion was filed more than 33 months after the BIA’s October 6, 2003 order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Hakobyan failed to establish that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Iturribcmia, 321 F.3d at 897 (equitable tolling available where “petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”).

Hakobyan’s remaining contentions are unavailing.

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