Case Name: Francisco Arellano ARELLANO; Adalid Arellano, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-18
Citations: 270 F. App'x 619
Docket Number: No. 07-73178
Parties: Francisco Arellano ARELLANO; Adalid Arellano, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 270
Pages: 619–620

Head Matter:
Francisco Arellano ARELLANO; Adalid Arellano, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-73178.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 10, 2008.
Filed March 18, 2008.
Francisco Arellano Arellano, Anaheim, CA, pro se.
Adalid Arellano Anaheim, CA pro se.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Corey L. Farrell, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: T.G. NELSON, TASHIMA 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
This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying as untimely petitioners' motion to reconsider.
The regulations provide that a motion to reconsider a decision of the BIA must be filed within 30 days of the challenged decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(2). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners' motion to reconsider filed June 4, 2007, more than 30 days after the BIA's March 30, 2007 decision. See Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004) (BIA's denial of a motion to reconsider is reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, respondent's motion for summary disposition is granted.
All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.