FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAFAEL VERDUZCO PARTIDA; et al., No. 08-74950
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A079-520-580
A078-112-390
v. A079-520-581
A079-520-582
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent. MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Rafael Verduzco Partida and family, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their
motion to reopen. 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 9th Cir. R. 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, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d
889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely petitioners’
motion to reopen because it was filed more than 90 days after the BIA’s final
removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish that
they were entitled to equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Iturribarria, 321
F.3d at 897 (deadline for filing a motion to reopen can be equitably tolled where a
petitioner acts with due diligence).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-74950