JOSE VINICIO-GONZALEZ, AKA William Omar Benavides, AKA William Omar Benevidas-Guevara v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE VINICIO-GONZALEZ, AKA
William Omar Benavides, AKA William
Omar Benevidas-Guevara,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70548
Agency No. A098-433-075
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Jose Vinicio-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 26 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-70548
Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Vinicio-Gonzalez’s contention that remand is warranted under Pereira v.
Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), is foreclosed by Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d
1158, 1160-62 (9th Cir. 2019) (initial notice to appear need not include time and
date information to vest jurisdiction in the immigration court).
Vinicio-Gonzalez provides no authority to support his contention that the
agency’s own regulations required sua sponte reopening of his case in order to
allow the IJ to inform him of potential eligibility for adjustment of status, or to
allow him to apply for that relief. We lack further jurisdiction to review the BIA’s
discretionary sua sponte determination. See Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 588
(9th Cir. 2016) (the court’s jurisdiction to review BIA decisions denying sua
sponte reopening is limited to reviewing the reasoning behind the decisions for
legal or constitutional error).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --