Case Name: Guadalupe Martinez VALERIANO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney-General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-28
Citations: 361 F. App'x 744
Docket Number: No. 08-74647
Parties: Guadalupe Martinez VALERIANO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney-General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 361
Pages: 744–744

Head Matter:
Guadalupe Martinez VALERIANO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney-General, Respondent.
No. 08-74647.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
Filed Dec. 28, 2009.
Guadalupe Martinez Valeriano, Anaheim, CA, for Petitioner.
Sharon Michele Clay, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Le-fevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE 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
Guadalupe Martinez Valeriano, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings.
We lack jurisdiction to review the Board's denial of Martinez Valeriano's motion to reopen, which introduced further evidence and argument regarding hardship to her United States citizen children. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 (9th Cir.2006) (explaining that § 1252(a)(2)(B)© bars jurisdiction when question presented in motion to reopen is essentially the same hardship ground originally decided).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.