Case Name: Maria SEGURA SEQUERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-20
Citations: 362 F. App'x 762
Docket Number: No. 07-72729
Parties: Maria SEGURA SEQUERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 362
Pages: 762–762

Head Matter:
Maria SEGURA SEQUERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-72729.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 11, 2010.
Filed Jan. 20, 2010.
Juan A. Laguna, Esquire, Law Offices of Juan A. Laguna, Santa Ana, CA, for Petitioner.
CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Christopher McGreal, Oil, Emily Anne Radford, James Arthur Hunolt, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Maria Segura Sequera, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying her motion to reopen. We dismiss the petition for review.
Segura Sequera has waived any challenge to the BIA's determination that her motion was untimely filed more than 90 days after the BIA's June 15, 2004, order by not raising it in her opening brief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996).
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).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.