Victor Manuel Briseno Godinez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
VICTOR MANUEL BRISENO
GODINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74520
Agency No. A095-178-461
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Victor Manuel Briseno Godinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
FILED
APR 13 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74520 2
reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v.
INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied Briseno Godinez’s
motion to reopen because he failed to voluntarily depart during his voluntary
departure period, and is therefore ineligible for cancellation of removal. See
8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(1); cf. Matter of Zmijewska, 24 I. & N. Dec. 87, 94 (BIA
2007).
We need not address Briseno Godinez’s remaining contentions, as they are
foreclosed by his ineligibility for relief.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --