From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pertuz v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 13, 2010
399 F. App'x 290 (9th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 08-74821.

Submitted September 13, 2010.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed October 13, 2010.

Piedad Del Carmen Perez Pertuz, Glendale, CA, pro se.

John D. Williams, Esquire, Julia Tyler,) Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, HI-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Honolulu, HI, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A074-351-894.

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Piedad del Carmen Perez Pertuz, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, 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 denying Perez Pertuz's July 3, 2008, motion to reopen as number-barred, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (party may file only one motion to reopen proceedings), and Perez Pertuz has not met any of the exceptions to the number bar, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Pertuz v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 13, 2010
399 F. App'x 290 (9th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

Pertuz v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:Piedad Del Carmen Perez PERTUZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 13, 2010

Citations

399 F. App'x 290 (9th Cir. 2010)