Orlando Gonzalez-Martinez 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 concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ORLANDO GONZALEZ-MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74476
Agency No. A095-725-814
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Orlando Gonzalez-Martinez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen removal
proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74476 2
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
reopen. Celis-Castellano v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 888, 890 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny
in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying Gonzalez-Martinez’s motion
to reopen as untimely where he filed it more than 16 months after he was ordered
removed in absentia. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(i).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Gonzalez-Martinez’s contention that he is
entitled to equitable tolling because he failed to exhaust this contention before the
agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (generally
requiring exhaustion of claims before the agency).
Gonzalez-Martinez’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --