NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA JANEHT RAFAEL DEPAZ, AKA No. 14-70672
Juana Raquel Depaz-Rafel, AKA Maria
Janeth Rafael Depaz, Agency No. A097-319-133
Petitioner,
MEMORANDUM*
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 16, 2016**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Maria Janeht Rafael Depaz petitions pro se for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reconsider the BIA’s
dismissal of her motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is
*
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).
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial
of a motion to reconsider, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002),
and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Rafael Depaz’s motion to
reconsider where Rafael Depaz failed to identify any error of fact or law in the
BIA’s prior order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1) (a motion to reconsider must
specify errors of fact or law in a prior decision). We lack jurisdiction to consider
new arguments Rafael Depaz makes that she did not raise in her motion to
reconsider to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.
2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 14-70672