Case Name: Juana DE LEON-BORAYO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-20
Citations: 444 F. App'x 197
Docket Number: No. 10-72723
Parties: Juana DE LEON-BORAYO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 444
Pages: 197–198

Head Matter:
Juana DE LEON-BORAYO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 10-72723.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 12, 2011.
Filed July 20, 2011.
Steve Paek, Law Office of Steve Paek, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Virginia Lum, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, 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
Juana De Leon-Borayo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying her motion to reopen deportation proceedings under section 203(c) of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act ("NACARA"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion by denying De Leon-Borayo's motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed after the September 11, 1998, filing deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1008.43(e)(1), and De Leon-Borayo's ignorance of the deadline and her status before the September 11, 1998, deadline was not caused by circumstances beyond her control, see Socop-Gonzalez, 272 F.3d at 1193 (equitable tolling available in circumstances beyond a "garden variety claim of excusable neglect."); cf. Albillo-De Leon v. Gonzales, 410 F.3d 1090, 1099 (9th Cir.2005) (NA-CARA deadline tolled where petitioner missed deadline because of representative's deception).
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.