J. Patrocinio Alfaro Perez 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).
/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
J. PATROCINIO ALFARO PEREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72092
Agency No. A095-293-198
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
J. Patrocinio Alfaro Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings
FILED
DEC 28 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

/Research 07-72092 2
conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Garcia v. INS, 222 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir.
2000) (per curiam), we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Alfaro Perez’s motion to
reopen because the record reflects that notice of the April 14, 2006, hearing was
mailed to the address of record of Alfaro Perez’s counsel. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1229(a)(2)(A) (notice may be served by mail on alien or alien’s counsel of
record); see also Garcia, 222 F.3d at 1209 (notice to counsel of record constitutes
notice to alien); Farhoud v. INS, 122 F.3d 794, 796 (9th Cir. 1997) (actual receipt
of notice by alien not required to satisfy due process).
To the extent Alfaro Perez contends that he failed to appear at his hearing
due to extraordinary circumstances, we lack jurisdiction because Alfaro Perez
failed to raise the issue before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674,
678 (9th Cir. 2004).
We do not consider the declaration of Albert Castro attached to Alfaro
Perez’s opening brief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A); Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955,

-- 2 of 3 --

/Research 07-72092 3
963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
Respondent’s motion to strike is denied as moot.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 3 of 3 --