GERONIMO ALVAREZ V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 12-74070 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 26 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GERONIMO ALVAREZ, No. 12-74070 Petitioner, Agency No. A029-138-490 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals December 17, 2013** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Geronimo Alvarez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge s denial of his motion to reopen deportation proceedings to pursue relief under the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act of 1997 * 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). ( NACARA ). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Alvarez s motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed more than eleven years after the relevant deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.43(e)(1) (a motion to reopen to pursue special rule suspension of deportation under NACARA must be filed no later than September 11, 1998), and Alvarez failed to demonstrate the due diligence required to obtain equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 679 (equitable tolling is available to a petitioner who is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud or error, and exercised due diligence in discovering such circumstances). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 12-74070

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.