Ismael Carrazco Gutierrez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ISMAEL CARRAZCO GUTIERREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70032
Agency No. A095-300-413
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Ismael Carrazco Gutierrez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reissue. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for
FILED
JUN 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-70032 2
abuse of discretion, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008), we grant
the petition for review and remand.
The BIA abused its discretion by failing to specifically address Carrazco
Gutierrez’s allegations that he did not receive notice of the BIA’s May 12, 2006,
order. See Singh v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 1170, 1172-73 (9th Cir. 2007)
(presumption of proper mailing may be overcome by evidence of non-receipt by
petitioner or counsel). We remand for the BIA to address Carrazco Gutierrez’s
allegations of non-receipt in the first instance and determine whether it is sufficient
to overcome the presumption of mailing. See id.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --