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 pane l unani 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 ar 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 GU ST AV O CHA I RE Z, 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. 08- 71065 A ge nc yN o. A 095- 181- 281 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 17, 2012 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , P A E Z , an dB E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. G ust avo C hai re z, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f M exi co, pet i t i on s pro se for r evi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order denyi ng hi s m ot i on t o reopen re m ov alproceedi ng s. O ur j uri sdi ct i on i s gov erned b y 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , O rdo n ezv . I NS , 345 F . 3d 

# FI LED APR23 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 71065 2 777, 782 ( 9th C i r . 2003) , and w e de nyi n partand di s m i s s i n partthe pe t i t i on f or r e v ie w . T he B IA di d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng C hai re z’ s m ot i on t o reopen because the B IA consi dere d the evi dence s ub m i tt ed and act ed w i thi n i t s broad di sc re t i on i n d et erm i ni ng C hai re z di d n otshow pri m a f ac i e e l i gi bi l i ty f

or re l i ef u n d e rth e C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rtu r e . Se e I N S v . A budu , 485 U . S . 94, 104- 05 ( 1 9 8 8 ) ( th e B I A m ayd e n yam o tio n to r e o p e n f o rf a ilu r e to e s tab lis h ap r im af a c ie c a s e f o rth e u n d e r ly in g r e lie f

s o u g h t) ; s e e a l

s o Si n gh v . I

NS , 295 F . 3d 1037, 1039 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) ( th e B I A ’s d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n s h a ll b e r e v e r s e do n lyif it i s “ arbi trary , i rr at i on al , or contraryt o l aw ”) . W e la c kju r is d ic tio n to r e v ie w th e B I A ’s d e n ia l o f C h a ir e z ’s m o tio n to r e o p e n b a s e do n f

u rth e re v id e n c e o f

h ar d s h ip to C h a ir e z ’s s o n . See Ferna ndezv. G on zales , 43 9 F . 3d 59 2, 59 9-60 3 (9th C i r. 20 06 ) ( expl ai ni ng that § 1 2 5 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ( i) b ar s ju r is d ic tio n w h e n q u e s tio n p r e s e n te din m o tio n to r e o p e n is e s s e nt i a l l ythe s a m e har ds hi p gr ound or i gi na l l yde c i de d) . W e a l s o l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w C ha i r e z ’ s c ha l l e nge s t o the a ge nc y ’ s i ni t i a l de ni a l of c anc e l l a t i on of re m ov al , because the pet i t i on for r evi ew i s nott i m el y a s t o thatorder. See Si ng h v. I NS , 3 1 5 F .3 d1 1 8 6 , 1 1 8 8 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) .08- 71065 3 F i na l l y , be c aus e the a ge nc ydi d note rr , C ha i r e z ’ s due pr oc e s s c ont e nt i ons f a il. Se e La ta v . I

NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 1246 ( 9th C i r . 2000) ( r e qui r i ng a ge nc ye rr or f o rap e titio n e rto p r e v a il o n adu e p r o c e s s c la im ) . P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.