FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 04 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAFAEL LOPEZ-LUCIO, No. 09-71820
Petitioner, Agency No. A093-469-365
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 20, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Rafael Lopez-Lucio, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen and
reconsider. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
*
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).
discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960,
964 (9th Cir. 2002), and review de novo constitutional claims, Ram v. INS, 243
F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir. 2001), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA was within its discretion in denying Lopez-Lucio’s motion to
reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the IJ’s
underlying order pretermitting his applications for adjustment of status and
cancellation of removal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272
F.3d 1176, 1180 n.2 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). Lopez-Lucio’s due process claims
therefore fail. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring
error and prejudice for a due process violation).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-71820