Jose Luis Martinez-Quintero; Maria De Los Angeles Martinez-Garcia v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
AR/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE LUIS MARTINEZ-QUINTERO;
MARIA DE LOS ANGELES
MARTINEZ-GARCIA,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70424
Agency Nos. A095-405-680
A095-405-681
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Martinez-Quintero and his wife, Maria De Los Angeles Martinez-
Garcia, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of an order of the Board
FILED
DEC 09 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AR/Research 07-70424 2
of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) 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 reopen, Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782
(9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Martinez’s motion to reopen
as untimely because it was filed over two years after the BIA’s final order of
removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within
ninety days of final order of removal), and Martinez did not show he was entitled
to equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003)
(deadline for filing motion to reopen can be equitably tolled “when petitioner is
prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner
acts with due diligence”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --