Legal Opinion

Romano v. Gonzales

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 12, 2007No. 07-70191Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition in part is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The regulations provide that “a party may file only one motion to reopen,” and that the motion “must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding sought to be reopened.” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). The BIA did not abuse its…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. James Lynn HootonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  2. Miguel Angel Iturribarria v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  3. Alliance for Water Efficiency v. James FryerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API