Salomon Manzanarez M, a.k.a. Salomon Manzanarez-Melchor; ADELA HERNANDEZ-CLAUDIO 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SALOMON MANZANAREZ M, a.k.a.
Salomon Manzanarez-Melchor; ADELA
HERNANDEZ-CLAUDIO,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73210
Agency Nos. A096-051-390
A096-051-391
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 14, 2013**
Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Salomon Manzanarez M and Adela Hernandez-Claudio, natives and citizens
of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order denying their motion to reconsider the BIA’s prior order denying
FILED
AUG 16 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-73210 2
their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider,
Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and deny the petition
for review.
The BIA was within its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reconsider because the motion failed to identify any error of fact or law in the
BIA’s prior decision denying petitioners’ motion to reopen removal proceedings.
See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6)(C); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1180 n. 2
(9th Cir. 2001) (en banc).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --