Nicolas Castaneda-Rodriguez v. Eric Holder, Jr.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUN 21 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS NICOLAS CASTANEDA RODRIGUEZ; No. 10-70502 et al., Agency Nos. A096-353-245 Petitioners, A096-353-246 A096-353-247 v. A096-353-248 ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM * Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 15, 2011 ** Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Nicolas Castaneda Rodriguez, Agustina Alvarado Avila, Martin Castaneda Alvarado, and Maria del Rosario Castaneda Alvarado, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen and reissue. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. * 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). § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Socop- Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to reopen and reissue on the ground that it was untimely, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners did not demonstrate the due diligence required to obtain equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Socop-Gonzalez, 272 F.3d at 1193 (tolling applies where “despite all due diligence, the party invoking equitable tolling is unable to obtain vital information bearing on the existence of the claim” as a result of circumstances beyond his control) (alterations and citation omitted). In light of our disposition, we need not address petitioners’ remaining contentions. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 10-70502