Enrique Valdez Mora, et al v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 09-70573 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED MAR 02 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ENRIQUE FERNANDO VALDEZ MORA; ANASTACIA ANTONIA VALDEZ, No. 09-70573 Agency Nos. A095-317-284 A095-317-285 Petitioners, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 15, 2011 ** Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Enrique Fernando Valdez Mora and Anastacia Antonia Valdez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction * 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). under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002), and we deny the petition for review. To the extent we have jurisdiction to review the BIA s denial of petitioners motion to remand, see Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir. 2006), we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant remand, 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 09-70573

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.