Case Name: Carmen P. LIMON; Adolfo Limon Gonzalez, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-08-22
Citations: 235 F. App'x 631
Docket Number: No. 05-77161
Parties: Carmen P. LIMON; Adolfo Limon Gonzalez, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 235
Pages: 631–632

Head Matter:
Carmen P. LIMON; Adolfo Limon Gonzalez, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-77161.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 13, 2007 .
Filed Aug. 22, 2007.
Helen B. Zebel, Esq., Law Office of Helen B. Zebel, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Paul L. Binder, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, Cleveland, OH, for Respondent.
Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Carmen P. Limón and her son, Adolfo Limón Gonzalez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, see Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners' motion to reopen where petitioners' evidence did not establish prima facie eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See id. at 785 (to establish a prima facie ease, the evidence must reveal a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied); Maroufi v. INS, 772 F.2d 597, 599 (9th Cir.1985) (no prima facie case established where "affidavit and application for asylum consisted solely of eonclusory and speculative inferences drawn from generalized events").
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.