Fernando Camargo-Zavala, et al v. Eric H. Holder Jr., No. 08-74561 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 26 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FERNANDO CAMARGO-ZAVALA; MARGARITA CAMARGO, No. 08-74561 Agency Nos. A096-072-106 A096-072-107 Petitioners, v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Fernando Camargo-Zavala and Margarita Camargo, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to * 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). reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA acted within its broad discretion in determining that, even assuming counsel failed to submit documentation, the evidence presented with the motion to reopen was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (BIA s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law ). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 08-74561

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.