FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICARDO CAMACHO BLANCAS; No. 07-73048
FRANCISCA CORDOVA CAMACHO,
Agency Nos. A075-507-129
Petitioners, A075-533-230
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010 **
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Ricardo Camacho Blancas and Francisca Cordova Camacho, husband and
wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. Our
*
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).
JT/Research
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
denial of a motion to reopen. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.
2002). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than two years after the
BIA’s May 24, 2005, order, and did not fall within one of the exceptions to the
ninety-day filing limit. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).
We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ contention that their motion
established grounds for equitable tolling of the ninety-day limit because petitioners
failed to exhaust this contention before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d
674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
JT/Research 2 07-73048