Santos Ventura-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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANTOS VENTURA-FLORES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71885
Agency No. A099-483-601
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Santos Ventura-Flores, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings
conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
FILED
JUL 06 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71885 2
review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Popa v. Holder,
571 F.3d 890, 894 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition
for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Ventura-Flores’ motion
to reopen because it is undisputed that the written notice of the hearing was mailed
to the most recent address provided by Ventura-Flores. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229(c).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Ventura-Flores’ unexhausted claim that his
due process rights were violated. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th
Cir. 2004).
Ventura-Flores’ remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --