Opinion
15-73827
05-26-2022
ADELSO DANIEL BARRIOS-CALDERON, AKA Adelso Daniel Barrios, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A070-819-144
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
Adelso Daniel Barrios-Calderon, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA's denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Barrios-Calderon's untimely motion to reopen because Barrios-Calderon failed to establish that he qualified for an exception to the time limitation for filing a motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir. 2008) (movant must produce material evidence that conditions in country of nationality had changed and establish a prima facie case for the relief sought).
Barrios-Calderon's contention that the BIA violated his right to due process fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (error required to prevail on a due process claim).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).