Samuel Gallegos Hernandez, et al v. Eric H. Holder Jr., No. 08-74363 (9th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED FEB 23 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SAMUEL GALLEGOS HERNANDEZ; MARIA HILDA GALLEGOS, Petitioners, Nos. 08-74363 09-70217 Agency Nos. A096-055-007 A096-055-008 v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM * Respondent. On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 15, 2011 ** Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. In these consolidated petitions for review, Samuel Gallegos Hernandez and Maria Hilda Gallegos, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) orders denying their motions to reopen and reconsider. 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). or reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petitions for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Gallegos and Gallegos Hernandez s motion to reopen as time-and number-barred, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to demonstrate the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Gallegos and Gallegos Hernandez s motion to reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA s prior decision denying reopening. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n.2 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 09-70217

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.