Reginalda Escobar Cetino, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 142 F.3d 442 (9th Cir. 1998)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Reginalda Escobar Cetino ("Petitioner"), a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") denial of her motion to reopen deportation proceedings. When Petitioner failed to appear for her deportation hearing, the IJ conducted the hearing in absentia, found Petitioner deportable, and entered an order of deportation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a).¹  We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, see Sharma v.. INS, 89 F.3d 545, 547 (9th Cir. 1996), and we deny the petition for review.

Petitioner contends that the BIA abused its discretion by denying her motion to reopen because her absence from the deportation hearing was due to the illness of her son. An order of deportation entered in absentia may be rescinded only if Petitioner demonstrates that she failed to appear because of exceptional circumstances. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(c) (3) (A). Exceptional circumstances are defined as "circumstances (such as serious illness of the alien or death of an immediate relative of the alien, but not including less compelling circumstances) beyond the control of the alien." 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(f) (2).

Petitioner failed to produce any evidence showing the specific nature of her son's medical condition, the seriousness of the illness, and why she was the only individual who could provide care to him. Because Petitioner failed to demonstrate that she failed to appear at her deportation hearing because of exceptional circumstances, the BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying her motion to reopen. See Sharma, 89 F.3d at 547; see also 8 C.F .R. § 3.2(c) (1) ("A motion to reopen proceedings ... shall be supported by affidavits or other evidentiary material.").

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.