Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves a petition for review by a citizen of El Salvador concerning a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that denied his motion to reconsider the denial of his second motion to reopen his immigration case. The court's jurisdiction for this review is based on 8 U.S.C. § 1252. The review of the BIA's denial of the motion to reconsider is conducted under the abuse of discretion standard, requiring a showing that the BIA acted arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law. The petition is dismissed in part because the court lacks jurisdiction over the BIA's earlier decision due to the petitioner's failure to comply with the 30-day filing requirement under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). The court further denies the petition in part, finding no abuse of discretion by the BIA and rejecting the petitioner's due process claims due to a lack of demonstrated error and prejudice. The court's decision is not intended for publication and does not serve as precedent except as provided under 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Due Process Claims in Immigration Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A petitioner must demonstrate error and prejudice to support a due process claim in immigration proceedings.
Reasoning: The court also rejects Aparicio-Barrera's claim that the BIA's decision stripped him of all constitutional protections, noting the requirement of demonstrating error and prejudice to support a due process claim.
Filing Timeliness under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA's decision on the second motion to reopen due to the untimeliness of the petition, which must be filed within a mandatory 30-day period.
Reasoning: The court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA's February 23, 2012, decision regarding the second motion to reopen, as Aparicio-Barrera did not file a timely petition for that decision, which is subject to a mandatory 30-day filing period under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1).
Jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court established its jurisdiction to review the denial of a motion to reconsider based on 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Reasoning: Jurisdiction is established under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Review Standard for Denial of Motion to Reconsidersubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The denial of a motion to reconsider is reviewed for abuse of discretion, which involves determining whether the Board acted arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law.
Reasoning: The review for the denial of a motion to reconsider is conducted for abuse of discretion, while due process claims are reviewed de novo, as established in Mohammed v. Gonzales.