Case Name: Valerio LIMON-GUERRERO, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-04
Citations: 670 F. App'x 557
Docket Number: No. 15-71030
Parties: Valerio LIMON-GUERRERO, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 557–558

Head Matter:
Valerio LIMON-GUERRERO, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 15-71030
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted October 25, 2016
Filed November 04, 2016
William J. Baker, Moreno & Associates, Chula Vista, CA, for Petitioner.
Anthony W. Norwood, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, 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
Valerio Limon-Guerrero, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order summarily affirming an immigration judge's order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo claims of due process violations. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate due process in denying Limon-Guerrero's motion to reopen, where Li-mon-Guerrero did not establish that his decision to accept voluntary departure and waive his right to appeal was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(3) (requirements for motion to reopen); Lata v. I.N.S., 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and prejudice to prevail on a due process claim); United States v. Ubaldo-Figueroa, 364 F.3d 1042, 1048 (9th Cir. 2004) (waiver of right to appeal a removal order does not comport with due process when it is not "considered and intelligent" (internal citation omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.