Felix Contreras; 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FELIX CONTRERAS; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70155
Agency Nos. A095-193-782
A095-193-783
A095-193-784
A095-193-785
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.
Felix Contreras, Maria Contreras, and their two children, natives and citizens
of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under
FILED
JUN 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70155 2
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
reopen, Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002), and we deny the
petition for review.
The BIA acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence
presented with the motion to reopen was insufficient to warrant reopening. See id.
(BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is “arbitrary,
irrational, or contrary to law”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --