Gilberto G. Rossaty, a.k.a. Gilberto Rossatti Mendez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GILBERTO G. ROSSATY, a.k.a. Gilberto
Rossatti Mendez,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71903
Agency No. A072-523-182
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 24, 2013**
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Gilberto G. Rossaty, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his
motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen,
FILED
SEP 30 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-71903 2
He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1130 (9th Cir. 2007), we deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Rossaty’s motion to reopen
as untimely and number barred, where Rossaty filed his motion approximately four
years after his order of removal became administratively final, had filed at least
seven prior motions to reopen, and did not demonstrate the applicability of any
exception to the time and numerical limitations on motions to reopen. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1229a(c)(7)(A), (C)(I); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).
We decline to treat the Attorney General’s invitation to strike Rossaty’s
opening brief as a motion to strike. See United States v. Rowe, 96 F.3d 1294, 1298
n.2 (9th Cir. 1996).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --