T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T OLEGARI O SOLTE RO- SANCHEZ, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 71236 A ge nc yN o. A 026- 720- 111 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M a y4, 2011 ** S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , M cK E O W N , an dC A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. O l egar i o S ol t er o-S anchez, nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f M exi co, pet i t i on s f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (B IA ) deni alof hi s m ot i on t o rec on si der, aft er th e B IA v acat edan Im m i g rat i o n Ju d g e’ s g ran to f S o l t ero -S an ch ez’ s req u est f o ra§ 2 1 2 ( c ) w a iv e ra s am a tte ro f d is c r e tio n . T h e B I A f

o u n dth a t to th e e x te n t it 

# FI LED JU N 02 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

c oul d c ons true the m ot i on f orr e c ons i de r a t i on a s am ot i on t o r e ope n, the r e w a s no e xpl a na t i on w hyS ol t e r o- S a nc he z ’ s ne w l ys ubm i tt e d ps y c hol ogi c a l c ons ul t a t i on r e p o rt r e g a r d in g r e h ab ilita tio n c o u ldn o t h a v e b e e n d is c o v e r e do rp r e s e n te da t h is r e m o v a l h e a r in g . W e have j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew “ w hether the B IA appl i ed the corre ctl egal st andard i n m aki ng i t s [ di sc re t i on ary] det erm i nat i on ” e ven tho ug h w e l ac k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w the B I A ’ s unde r l y i ng de c i s i on r e ga r di ng w he the rS ol t e r oS a n c h e z s h o u ldb e g r a n te d§ 2 1 2 ( c ) r e lie f . A na ya-O rt i z v . H older , 594 F . 3d 673, 6 7 6 (9 th C ir. 2 0 1 0 ) ( in tern al q u o tati o n m ar k s o m itted ). W e w il l rev er se th e B IA ’s deni alof a m ot i on for r ec on si dera t i on or t o reopen “onl y i f the B IA ac t ed arbi trari l y, i rr at i on al l y, or contraryt o l aw . ” Moh am m ed v. G on zales , 400 F . 3d 7 8 5 , 7 9 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . T he B IA di d n oterr i n d enyi ng S ol t er o-S anchez’ s m ot i on t o rec on si der b e c au s e h is m o tio n d idn o t s p e c if ye rr o r s o f

f a c t o rla w in th e B I A ’s d e c is io n . 8 C . F . R . § 1003. 2( b) ( 1) ( “ A m ot i on t o r e c ons i de rs ha l l s t a t e the r e a s ons f orthe m o tio n b ys p e c if

y in g th e e rr o r s o f

f a c t o rla w in th e p r io rB o a r dd e c is io n a n ds h a ll b e s up p o rte db yp e rtin e n t au th o r ity .” ) . T h e B I A a ls o d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in denyi ng S ol t er o-S anchez’ s m ot i on t o reopen thatw as base d o n the new l y pre se nt ed ps y c hol ogi c a l r e port . S ol t e r o- S a nc he z f a i l e d t o s how tha tthe r e portw a s not3

p r e v io u s lya v a ilab le . See 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 2(c) (1) ( “ A m ot i on t o reopen proceedi ng s s hal l no tbe grant ed un l es s i tappears t o the B oard thatevi dence soug htt o b e off

er ed i s m at er i aland w as no tavai l abl e and coul d n othave been di sc ov er ed or pres ent ed atthe form erhear i ng . ”) . PETI TI O N D EN I ED .