Raul Parga-Rosas 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).
KS/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAUL PARGA-ROSAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 05-76592
Agency No. A035-001-589
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 16, 2010**
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Raul Parga-Rosas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in
FILED
MAR 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

KS/Research 05-76592 2
absentia. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse
of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo questions of law.
Garcia v. INS, 222 F.3d 1208, 1209 (9th Cir. 2000) (per curiam). We deny the
petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Parga-Rosas’ motion to
reopen because the record reflects that notice of the February 3, 2005, hearing was
mailed to the address of record of Parga-Rosas’ counsel. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1229(a)(2)(A) (notice may be served by mail on alien or alien’s counsel of
record); see also Garcia, 222 F.3d at 1209 (notice to counsel of record constitutes
notice to alien); Farhoud v. INS, 122 F.3d 794, 796 (9th Cir. 1997) (actual receipt
of notice by alien not required to satisfy due process).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --