Kuljit Kaur; Jasmine Kaur; Jaskaran Singh v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

07-70734Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit16 de jul. de 2010

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KULJIT KAUR; JASMINE KAUR;
JASKARAN SINGH,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70734
Agency Nos. A055-719-419
A055-719-420
A055-719-421
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Kuljit Kaur and her children, natives and citizens of India, petition for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their
FILED
JUL 16 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

07-70734 2
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their motion for a
continuance of removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for a continuance, Ahmed
v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the petition for
review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ August 10,
2005, request for a further continuance because both the BIA and the IJ offered
reasoned bases for the denial, and petitioners did not establish that a further
continuance would benefit their pursuit of relief from removal. See Singh v. INS,
213 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir. 2000) (agency abuses discretion when it acts
“arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law”) (internal quotation marks and
citations omitted); see also Ahmed, 569 F.3d at 1012 (evaluating, among other
factors, the nature of evidence excluded as a result of the denial of the continuance,
the reasonableness of the immigrant’s conduct, and the reasoned bases of the
agency’s denial).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 3 --

07-70734 3

-- 3 of 3 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.