Unpublished Disposition, 869 F.2d 1499 (9th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 869 F.2d 1499 (9th Cir. 1989)

Roberto VILLEGAS-LIZARRAGA, Petitioner,v.IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 87-7528.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 7, 1989.Decided Feb. 16, 1989.

Before GOODWIN, Chief Judge, and ALARCON and NELSON, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM* 

Roberto Villegas-Lizarraga petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision affirming the immigration judge's finding of deportability and denial of discretionary relief pursuant to section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1970). Villegas-Lizarraga also petitions for review of the BIA's denial of his request for a stay pending the BIA's adjudication of his motion to reopen.

The petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Fayazi-Azad v. INS, 792 F.2d 873 (9th Cir. 1986); Hyun Joon Chung v. INS, 720 F.2d 1471 (9th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1216 (1984). Fayazi-Azad established the Ninth Circuit rule that this court does not have jurisdiction to review a BIA decision affirming the immigration judge's finding of deportability and denying discretionary relief in cases where the petitioner has filed a motion to reopen prior to filing a petition for review with this court. The Fayazi-Azad decision reasoned that a motion to reopen the administrative case prevents the underlying deportation order from being final and appealable.

The BIA's denial of a motion to stay deportation pending a ruling of a motion to reopen also is not a final order of deportation reviewable by this court. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1105(a); Dhangu v. INS, 812 F.2d 455, 458-59 (9th Cir. 1987); Kemper v. INS, 705 F.2d 1150 (9th Cir. 1983).

The above-cited precedents preclude appellate review. The petition is DISMISSED.

 *

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3