Case Name: Ofelia Medrano WAMEA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-30
Citations: 360 F. App'x 920
Docket Number: No. 06-73646
Parties: Ofelia Medrano WAMEA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 360
Pages: 920–921

Head Matter:
Ofelia Medrano WAMEA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-73646.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
Filed Dec. 30, 2009.
Deniz S. Arik, Esquire, The Law Office of Deniz S. Arik, John Martin Pope, Pope & Associates, P.C., Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner.
Andrew Jacob Oliveira, Esquire, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, District Counsel Phoenix, Esquire, Office of the District Director, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Phoenix, AZ, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, 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
Ofelia Medrano Wamea, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's order denying her motion to reconsider. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Medrano Wamea's motion to reconsider because the motion was untimely and failed to specify error in the IJ's removal order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1), (2).
To the extent Medrano Wamea seeks an extension of her voluntary departure period, the request is denied. See Zazueta-Carrillo v. Ashcroft, 322 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.2003); see also Garcia v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 1157, 1159 (9th Cir.2004) (order).
Medrano Wamea's remaining contentions lack merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.