Case Name: Maria Irene MEDINA SEGOVIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-25
Citations: 229 F. App'x 577
Docket Number: No. 05-74598
Parties: Maria Irene MEDINA SEGOVIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 229
Pages: 577–578

Head Matter:
Maria Irene MEDINA SEGOVIA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-74598.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 16, 2007 .
Filed April 25, 2007.
Nadeem H. Makada, Esq., Burlingame, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kurt B. Larson, Esq., Stacy S. Paddack, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER, and BEA, 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 Irene Medina Segovia, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA considered the evidence Medina Segovia 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) (stating rule that the BIA's denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is "arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law").
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.