Eleuterio Reyes Vasquez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ELEUTERIO REYES VASQUEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71733
Agency No. A096-061-860
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Eleuterio Reyes Vasquez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
JUL 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-71733 2
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894
(9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Reyes Vasquez’s motion to
reopen, where the BIA considered the new evidence of his United States citizen
daughter’s mental health condition and acted within its broad discretion in
determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh v.
INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall
be reversed only if it is “arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law.”)
To the extent Reyes Vasquez contends that the BIA failed to consider some
or all of the evidence he submitted with the motion to reopen, he has not overcome
the presumption that the BIA did review the record. See Franco-Rosendo v.
Gonzales, 454 F.3d 965, 966 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --