Luz Maria Martinez-Martinez 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
KS/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUZ MARIA MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71873
Agency No. A077-062-204
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Luz Maria Martinez-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
reopen. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
JAN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

KS/Research 07-71873 2
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 provided adequate consideration of the supporting evidence
Martinez-Martinez submitted with her motion, including the psychological
evaluation of her U.S. citizen son, and acted within its broad discretion in
determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Lopez v.
Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 799, 807 n.6 (9th Cir. 2004) (BIA is required to “consider the
issues raised, and announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing
court to perceive that it has heard and thought and not merely reacted”) (citation
omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --