Fernando C. Sosa v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FERNANDO C. SOSA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71546
Agency No. A070-663-257
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Fernando C. Sosa, a native and citizen of Ecuador, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings to seek relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen.
FILED
DEC 6 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Sosa’s motion to reopen as
untimely where the motion was filed over seven years after the BIA’s final order,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and the BIA acted within its broad discretion in
determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility
for CAT relief. See Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 986 (agency may deny a motion to
reopen based on failure to establish a prima facie case for the relief sought); see
also Mendez-Gutierrez v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1168, 1172 (9th Cir. 2006) (“vague
and conclusory allegations” insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility). We
reject Sosa’s claim that the BIA erroneously required corroboration.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --