Heidi G. Aldana 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
HEIDI G. ALDANA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74854
Agency No. A074-802-913
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Heidi G. Aldana, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
JAN 18 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74854 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d
889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Aldana’s motion
to reopen because the motion was filed more than eight years after the BIA’s final
order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Aldana did not establish that she
acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the time limitation,
see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897. We therefore do not address the merits of the
motion.
To the extent we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to
invoke its sua sponte authority, the BIA acted within its broad discretion in
declining to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --