Juan Contreras v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 09-60880 (5th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 09-60880 Document: 00511323762 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/16/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 09-60880 Summary Calendar December 16, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JUAN HERNAN CONTRERAS, Petitioner v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A028 021 832 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Juan Hernan Contreras, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the Board s) decision denying his motion to reconsider. Contreras s motion to reconsider was filed after the Board s August 10, 2009 dismissal of his appeal from the Immigration Judge s (IJ s) denial of his motion to reopen his 1995 deportation proceedings. Contreras did not file a petition for review of the Board s August 10, 2009 dismissal of his appeal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Guevara v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 173, 176 (5th * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. Case: 09-60880 Document: 00511323762 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/16/2010 No. 09-60880 Cir. 2006). Therefore, that decision became final. See Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 388-90, 394-95 (1995). Nevertheless, the arguments in Contreras s brief are all aimed at challenging the August 10, 2009 dismissal and the IJ s denial of his motion to reopen. Absent a timely petition for review of the August 10, 2009 order, this court lacks jurisdiction to review Contreras s claims. See Stone, 514 U.S. at 394-95. Although Contreras raised the issue of venue in his motion to reconsider, he does not make any arguments relating to venue. He has therefore abandoned the only issue before this court. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). Contreras s petition for review is therefore DENIED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.