Paulino Alzate Nava 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
PAULINO ALZATE NAVA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73967
Agency No. A075-598-528
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 6, 2012**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Paulino Alzate Nava, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen.
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.
FILED
MAR 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-73967 2
2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Alzate Nava’s motion to
reopen where he filed the motion seven years after the BIA issued its final order of
removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to demonstrate the due diligence
required to obtain equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d
at 897.
In light of our disposition, we do not address Alzate Nava’s remaining
contention.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --