Maria Lisbeth Navarro- Vargas 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARIA LISBETH NAVARRO-
VARGAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73138
Agency No. A096-051-962
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Maria Lisbeth Navarro-Vargas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her
motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
NOV 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73138 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400
F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Navarro-Vargas’ motion to
reopen as time- and number-barred where the successive motion was filed nearly
four years after the BIA’s July 27, 2004, order dismissing her underlying appeal,
and Navarro-Vargas failed to demonstrate that she qualified for an exception to the
time and number limits, or for equitable tolling. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)-(3);
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897-98 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --