Case Name: Jayantibhai DESAI; Indiraben Patel, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-23
Citations: 294 F. App'x 322
Docket Number: Nos. 05-74854, 06-75073
Parties: Jayantibhai DESAI; Indiraben Patel, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 294
Pages: 322–323

Head Matter:
Jayantibhai DESAI; Indiraben Patel, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Nos. 05-74854, 06-75073.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
Filed Sept. 23, 2008.
Elif Keles, Carl M. Shusterman, Law Offices of Carl M. Shusterman, Los Ange-les, CA, for Petitioners.
CAC-District Counsel, 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, Richard Zanfardino, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and N.R. 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
In these consolidated petitions, Jayanti-bhai Desai, a native and citizen of India, and Indiraben Patel, a native of Tanzania and citizen of the United Kingdom, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's removal orders, No. 05-74854, and of the BIA order denying their motion to reopen, No. 06-75073. We deny petition No. 05-74854 and dismiss petition No. 06-75073.
In Jayantibhai v. Gonzales, No. 04-74607 (9th Cir. Feb 15, 2005) (order), the court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction a petition for review of the BIA order dismissing petitioners' appeal. We do not revisit that determination.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA's decision not to invoke its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 993 n. 8 (9th Cir.2008) (mandate pending).
No. 05-74584 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED;
No. 06-75073 PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.