Rodolfo Ruiz-Montes De Oca 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RODOLFO RUIZ-MONTES DE OCA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72832
Agency No. A097-351-699
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Rodolfo Ruiz-Montes De Oca, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400
FILED
SEP 17 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-72832 2
F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
Ruiz-Montes De Oca fails to raise, and therefore has waived, any challenge
to the BIA’s determination that reopening in response to his third motion to reopen
is not warranted under Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148 (9th Cir. 2010).
See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues that
are not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s March 16, 2007, order dismissing
Ruiz-Montes De Oca’s direct appeal of the immigration judge’s decision because
this petition for review is not timely as to that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d
1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --