Gloria Montoya De Soto v. Jefferson Sessions

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 15 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GLORIA MARIA MONTOYA DE No. 13-70564 SOTO, Agency No. A089-532-081 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 8, 2017** Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Gloria Maria Montoya de Soto, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying adjustment of status. We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Garfias- Rodriguez v. Holder, 702 F.3d 504, 512 n.6 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). We grant the petition for review and remand. At the time the BIA determined that Matter of Briones, 24 I. & N. Dec. 355 (BIA 2007), applied retroactively to render Montoya de Soto ineligible to adjust status, the BIA did not have the benefit of this court’s decision in Acosta-Olivarria v. Lynch, 799 F.3d 1271, 1274-77 (9th Cir. 2015). Like the petitioner in Acosta- Olivarria, Montoya de Soto applied for adjustment of status during the 21-month window between Acosta v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 550 (9th Cir. 2006) (permitting adjustment of status for an alien inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(I)), and Briones, when it was reasonable for Montoya de Soto to rely on our decision in Acosta. See Acosta-Olivarria, 799 F.3d at 1274-77. As there is no significant factual basis to distinguish Montoya de Soto’s situation from the one presented in Acosta-Olivarria, we remand to the agency to reconsider her contention in light of Acosta-Olivarria. In light of this disposition, we do not reach Montoya de Soto’s remaining contentions. PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED. 2 13-70564