NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 30 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIANO ANTONIO FLORES No. 17-70886
CASTILLO,
Agency No. A205-186-412
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Mariano Antonio Flores Castillo, 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 decision denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 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, and
review de novo constitutional claims and questions of law. Mohammed v.
Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005).
The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate due process in denying
Flores Castillo’s motion to reopen for failure to establish exceptional
circumstances, where he failed to attend his hearing because he was confused
about the date. See 8 C.F.R. §1003.23(b)(4)(ii); 8 U.S.C. §1229a(e)(1) (defining
exceptional circumstances as circumstances beyond the control of the alien);
Valencia-Fragoso v. INS, 321 F.3d 1204, 1205-06 (9th Cir. 2003) (no exceptional
circumstances where petitioner forgot the scheduled time of her hearing); Lata v.
INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial prejudice
to prevail on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 17-70886