FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 16 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE ANGEL ERAZO-RIVAS, No. 08-71072
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-989-531
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010 **
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Jose Angel Erazo-Rivas, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his
motion to reconsider. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
*
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).
IH/Research
review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider, Cano-Merida v.
INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in construing Erazo-Rivas’s motion,
filed January 15, 2008, as a motion to reconsider. See Mohammed v. Gonzales,
400 F.3d 785, 793 (9th Cir. 2005) (where a petitioner improperly titles a motion to
reopen or reconsider, the BIA should construe the motion based on its underlying
purpose). So construed, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Erazo-
Rivas’s motion to reconsider as untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(2). Erazo-
Rivas’s due process claim therefore fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246
(9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a due process violation).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IH/Research 2 07-71072