Florencio Salinas-Lopez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FLORENCIO SALINAS-LOPEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-75126
Agency No. A090-937-249
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Florencio Salinas-Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
SEP 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-75126 2
for abuse of 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 in denying Salinas-Lopez’s motion to
reopen as untimely because it was filed more than five years after the BIA’s final
order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Salinas-Lopez failed to establish
grounds for equitable tolling, see Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1193 (9th
Cir. 2001) (en banc) (equitable tolling applies where “despite all due diligence, [the
party invoking equitable tolling] is unable to obtain vital information bearing on
the existence of the claim”) (internal quotation and citation omitted). We therefore
do not reach Salinas-Lopez’s contentions related to his former counsel’s alleged
ineffective assistance.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --