Jorge Fernando Murga-Aquino, a.k.a. George Murga a.k.a. Jorge Fernando Murga 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JORGE FERNANDO MURGA-AQUINO,
a.k.a. George Murga a.k.a. Jorge Fernando
Murga,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74649
Agency No. A070-500-558
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Jorge Fernando Murga-Aquino, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
FILED
JUN 10 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74649 2
motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review 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 Murga-Aquino’s motion to
reopen as untimely because it was filed five years after the BIA’s final order of
removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within
90 days of final order of removal), and Murga-Aquino did not show he was entitled
to equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (deadline for filing motion to
reopen can be equitably tolled “when petitioner is prevented from filing because of
deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”).
Murga-Aquino’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --