Court Opinion

ID: 9911288
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-19 20:01:32.633108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:57:49.982407
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                          FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       DEC 19 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ELEAZAR PORCAYO-GARCIA,                         No. 22-1830
                                                Agency No.
             Petitioner,                        A078-001-738
 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

             Respondent.

                     On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                         Board of Immigration Appeals

                           Submitted December 12, 2023**

Before:      WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

      Eleazar Porcayo-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597

F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

      The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Porcayo-Garcia’s motion to

reopen as untimely, where it was filed five months after the order of removal

became final, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed

within ninety days of the final removal order), and where Porcayo-Garcia has not

established changed country conditions in Mexico to qualify for an exception to

the filing deadline, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538

F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir. 2008) (movant must produce material evidence that

conditions in country of nationality had changed).

      The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                        2                                  22-1830