Case Name: Gabriel Nava GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-06-24
Citations: 439 F. App'x 669
Docket Number: No. 10-70546
Parties: Gabriel Nava GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 439
Pages: 669–669

Head Matter:
Gabriel Nava GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 10-70546.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 15, 2011.
Filed June 24, 2011.
Gabriel Nava Garcia, El Monte, CA, pro se.
Seth A. Director, Trial, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Gabriel Nava Garcia, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Garcia's motion to reopen because it was untimely and because it did not establish prima facie eligibility for relief. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c) (setting forth 90-day period for filing motion to reopen).
We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Garcia's challenge to the Board's refusal to reopen proceedings sua sponte. Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.2002).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.