Case Name: Shing-Ting YAO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-14
Citations: 171 F. App'x 73
Docket Number: No. 04-75726
Parties: Shing-Ting YAO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 171
Pages: 73–73

Head Matter:
Shing-Ting YAO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-75726.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2006.
Decided March 14, 2006.
Before: CANBY, BEEZER, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Shing-Ting Yao, a native and citizen of the People's Republic of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("IJ") order denying his motion to reopen deportation proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion, Singh v. INS, 213 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir.2000), and we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.
The IJ denied reopening on the ground that Yao had received proper notice. We remand to the agency to consider Yao's argument, presented in his brief to the BIA, that the Postal Service delivered his hearing notice to an incorrect address. 'We have long held that the BIA abuses its discretion when it fails to provide a reasoned explanation for its actions." Movsisian v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1095, 1098 (9th Cir.2005); Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that "[t]he BIA is not free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner").
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.