Maria Zepeda Real v. Eric H. Holder Jr., No. 08-74908 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 07 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA DE LA GRACIA ZEPEDA REAL, No. 08-74908 Agency No. A076-710-013 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 23, 2010 ** Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Maria De La Gracia Zepeda Real, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Zepeda Real s motion to reopen because she did not submit any evidence relating to her continuous physical presence. See INS v. Wang, 450 U.S. 139, 141 (1981) (per curiam) (movant must show prima facie eligibility for the underlying substantive relief requested in a motion to reopen); Juarez-Ramos v. Gonzales, 485 F.3d 509, 512 (9th Cir. 2007) (an expedited removal order interrupts an alien s continuous physical presence for cancellation purposes). We lack jurisdiction to review Zepeda Real s collateral challenge to her expedited removal order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(A) & (e)(2) (judicial review of an expedited removal order is restricted to limited habeas review before the district court); see also Avendano-Ramirez v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 813, 818-19 (9th Cir. 2004) (collateral attack on expedited removal orders severely limited). Zepeda Real s remaining contentions are unavailing. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part, DISMISSED in part. 2 08-74908

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.