Juan Gerardo Martinez-Reyes 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.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN GERARDO MARTINEZ-REYES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 96-70204
Agency No. A070-926-460
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted July 9, 2009
Pasadena, California
Before: WARDLAW, RAWLINSON and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Juan Gerardo Martinez-Reyes (Martinez-Reyes) appeals the Board
of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial
of his application for suspension of deportation based on extreme hardship. See 8
U.S.C. § 1254(a)(1).
FILED
NOV 25 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

The BIA considered the relevant evidence supporting Martinez-Reyes’s
claim before finding that his hardships were not extreme. In doing so, the BIA
articulated reasons supported by the record for its decision. Because it “considered
all of the relevant facts and articulated reasons for denying suspension that are
supported by the record”, the BIA did not abuse its discretion. See Astrero v.
I.N.S., 104 F.3d 264, 267 (9th Cir. 1996).
Although we deny the petition for review, due to the unusual procedural
posture of this case, we stay issuance of the mandate for 180 days to provide
Martinez-Reyes an opportunity to file a motion to reopen with the BIA. See Ortiz
v. I.N.S., 179 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 1999) (staying mandate to allow petitioners
an opportunity to file a motion to reopen). Although we do not address the merits
of Martinez-Reyes’s claim, we note that his recent deportation does not preclude
him from filing a motion to reopen. See Reynoso-Cisneros v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d
1001, 1002 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED; ISSUANCE OF MANDATE
STAYED FOR 180 DAYS.

-- 2 of 2 --