FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 10 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FERNANDO ORTIZ-ROMERO, No. 11-73365
Petitioner, Agency No. A076-713-230
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 6, 2014**
Pasadena, California
Before: PREGERSON, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Fernando Ortiz-Romero (“Romero”) petitions for review of a decision by the
Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) that denied his second motion to reopen
removal proceedings sua sponte. We have jurisdiction to review a final order of
removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss the petition.
*
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).
After considering Romero’s second motion under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) for
sua sponte reopening of his removal proceedings, the BIA held that it did not have
jurisdiction under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(d).
Alternatively, the BIA stated that even if jurisdiction were proper, it would
not reopen Romero’s proceedings under its § 1003.2(a) sua sponte discretion.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s unfettered § 1003.2(a) discretion
not to reopen removal proceedings. See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th
Cir. 2002); see also Sharma v. Holder, 633 F.3d 865, 874 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW IS DISMISSED.
2