FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 9 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANTIAGO NUNEZ; et al., No. 10-70937
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A070-918-878
A070-918-879
v. A070-918-880
A070-918-881
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, A070-918-882
A070-918-883
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
**
Submitted August 2, 2011
Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Santiago Nunez, Rosa Hernandez, Adriana Nunez, Santiago Nunez, Fabian
Nunez, and Jorge Nunez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration
*
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).
judge’s denial of their motion to reopen deportation proceedings conducted in
absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen proceedings conducted in absentia,
Garcia v. INS, 222 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir. 2000), and we deny the petition for
review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen because it was filed more than ten years after their final order of
deportation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(iii)(A)(1), and petitioners did not
establish that they acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see
Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1193 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc) (equitable
tolling available where, despite due diligence, petitioner is unable to obtain vital
information bearing on the existence of a claim because of circumstances beyond
petitioner’s control).
We deny the government’s motion to stay proceedings.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 10-70937