215 F. App'x 672

Damian Diaz ESPINOZA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-74512.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 21, 2006.*

Filed Dec. 27, 2006.

Damian Diaz Espinoza, San Luis Obispo, CA, pro se.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Barry J. Pettinato, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM **

Damian Diaz Espinoza, 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 (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in upholding the IJ’s denial of reopening, on the ground that Diaz Espinoza did not demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (applicant for CAT relief must prove “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal”); Mendez-Gutierrez v. Ashcroft, 340 F.3d 865, 869-70 (9th Cir. 2003) (“prima facie eligibility for the relief sought is a prerequisite for the granting of a motion to reopen”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

Espinoza v. Gonzales
215 F. App'x 672

Case Details

Name
Espinoza v. Gonzales
Decision Date
Dec 27, 2006
Citations

215 F. App'x 672

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!