Petra Tobias v. U.S. Attorney General

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-10541
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
Agency No. A099-105-917
PETRA TOBIAS,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
________________________
(October 10, 2012)
Before BARKETT, PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Petra Tobias seeks review of the BIA’s decision to dismiss her motion to
Case: 12-10541 Date Filed: 10/10/2012 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

reconsider as procedurally barred. She argues that given the circumstances of this
case, there is no procedural bar on multiple motions to reconsider.
We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reconsider for abuse of
discretion. Calle v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 504 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007). An
exercise of administrative discretion will not be upheld if it is arbitrary or
capricious. Abdi v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 430 F.3d 1148, 1149 (11th Cir. 2005). “A
party may file only one motion to reconsider any given decision and may not seek
reconsideration of a decision denying a previous motion to reconsider.” 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(b)(2).
On appeal, Tobias does not argue that she has not filed two motions to
reconsider, and any such argument is therefore abandoned. Carmichael v.
Kellogg, Brown & Root Serv., Inc., 572 F.3d 1271, 1293 (11th Cir. 2009). Agency
regulations state that only one motion to reconsider can be filed for any decision,
and a party may not request reconsideration of a motion to reconsider. 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(b)(2). Because there is no argument that she does not have two motions
to reconsider, her present motion was her second motion to reconsider.
Accordingly, the BIA correctly denied it and did not act in an arbitrary or
capricious manner.
PETITION DENIED.
2
Case: 12-10541 Date Filed: 10/10/2012 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --