Rafael Arevalo-Orozco, a.k.a. Rafael Arevalo Orosco 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RAFAEL AREVALO-OROZCO, a.k.a.
Rafael Arevalo Orosco,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-70913
Agency No. A092-750-172
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 23, 2010**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Rafael Arevalo-Orozco, a native a citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
reconsider. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider, and review de novo questions of
FILED
AUG 31 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

06-70913 2
law and constitutional claims. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.
2002). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Arevalo-Orozco’s motion to
reconsider because the motion failed to specify an error in the BIA’s underlying
order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1). Contrary to his contention, Arevalo-Orozco is
ineligible for relief under former section 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (repealed
1996), because his ground of removability lacks a statutory counterpart in a ground
of inadmissibility. See 8 C.F.R. § 1212.3(f)(5); Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203,
1207 & 1208 n.7 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc). Arevalo-Orozco’s remaining legal and
constitutional challenges to the BIA’s determination that he is ineligible for section
212(c) relief are unavailing. See Abebe, 554 F.3d at 1207 & 1208 n.7.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --