Case Name: Maria Lourdes Moreno DE AVILA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-08-01
Citations: 195 F. App'x 648
Docket Number: No. 05-74276
Parties: Maria Lourdes Moreno DE AVILA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 195
Pages: 648–649

Head Matter:
Maria Lourdes Moreno DE AVILA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-74276.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2006.
Filed Aug. 1, 2006.
Jessica E. Smith, Fresno, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of The District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Anthony P. Nicastro, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: ALARCÓN, 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).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Maria Lourdes Moreno De Avila, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We deny the petition for review.
The BIA considered the evidence petitioner submitted with her motion to reopen and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (The BIA's denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is "arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law.").
Petitioner's contention that the BIA deprived her of due process by selectively weighing the evidence is not supported by the record and does not amount to a color-able due process claim. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.