ROJAS HERNANDEZ v. SESSIONS III (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Karen Vanessa Rojas-Hernandez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reconsider its prior denial of her motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 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, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Rojas-Hernandez’s challenges to the agency’s denial of her motion to reopen, because this petition is not timely as to the BIA’s August 2012 order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1) (petition for review must be filed within 30 days of the order under review).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Rojas-Hernandez’s motion to reconsider on the ground that she did not meet her burden to show she provided an address at which she could be contacted, where all immigration court notices sent to the address on file were returned as undeliverable. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii) (a motion to reopen in absentia proceedings based on lack of notice may be filed at any time); 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1)(F)(i) (“the alien must immediately provide ․ a written record of an address ․ at which the alien may be contacted ․”); 8 U.S.C. § 1229(c) (“Service by mail [of a hearing notice] shall be sufficient if there is proof of attempted delivery to the last address provided by the alien ․”)

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.