Elisangela Oliveira Cardoso- Caetano 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).
AR/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ELISANGELA OLIVEIRA CARDOSO-
CAETANO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71956
Agency No. A097-344-094
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.
Elisangela Oliveira Cardoso-Caetano, a native and citizen of Brazil, petitions
for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying her
motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
JAN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AR/Research 07-71956 2
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen,
Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to reopen
because the BIA considered the evidence Cardoso-Caetano submitted and acted
within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to
warrant reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (the
BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or
contrary to law.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --