Case Name: Ricardo AGUILAR-VARILLAS, et al., Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-29
Citations: 275 F. App'x 728
Docket Number: No. 07-72702
Parties: Ricardo AGUILAR-VARILLAS, et al., Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 275
Pages: 728–729

Head Matter:
Ricardo AGUILAR-VARILLAS, et al., Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-72702.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 22, 2008.
Filed April 29, 2008.
Martin A. Robles, Esq., Law Offices of Martin Resendez Guajardo, A Professional Corporation, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ricardo Aguilar-Varillas, and his two daughters, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial, as untimely filed, of their motion to reopen or reconsider removal proceedings.
Petitioners fail to raise any arguments regarding whether the BIA erred in finding that them motion to reopen or reconsider was untimely, whether equitable tolling is applicable, and whether the BIA erred in refusing to reopen sua sponte. Petitioners, therefore, have waived any challenge to the BIA's decision denying their motion. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.