Trinidad Marilu Paulet De Flores; 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
TRINIDAD MARILU PAULET DE
FLORES; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-75572
Agency Nos. A077-125-608
A077-125-609
A077-125-610
A077-125-611
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Trinidad Marilu Paulet De Flores, Juan Aurelio Flores Lazo, Juan Alfonso
Flores Paulet, and Emily Flores Paulet, natives and citizens of Peru, petition for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion
FILED
FEB 23 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

/Research 06-75572 2
to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.
2004), we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioners’ untimely
motion to reopen because the motion failed to present materially changed
circumstances in Peru. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Malty, 381 F.3d at
945.
Petitioners’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --