Marco Antonio Garcia- Navichoque 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARCO ANTONIO GARCIA-
NAVICHOQUE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71682
Agency No. A027-617-020
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Marco Antonio Garcia-Navichoque, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying
his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by
FILED
APR 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-71682 2
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. 2003). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Garcia-Navichoque’s
motion to reopen as untimely, and he failed to qualify for any exception to the time
limitation. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c). We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s sua
sponte denial of the motion to reopen. See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159
(9th Cir. 2002).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --