Feliz-Cruz v. Gonzales

*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 14, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-60327
Summary Calendar
MILCIADES FELIZ-CRUZ,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A72 838 042
--------------------
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and KING and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Milciades Feliz-Cruz (Feliz) petitions this court for review
of the BIA’s denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Feliz concedes that he has filed two motions to reopen, but he
contends that because his first motion alleged that he was denied
notice before the immigration judge issued an in absentia removal
order, the first motion should not count against the numerical
limitation placed on motions to reopen. Feliz cannot establish
that the BIA abused its discretion in denying his most recent
motion to reopen as exceeding the numerical limitation on such

-- 1 of 2 --

2
filings. See Altamirano-Lopez v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 547, 549-50
(5th Cir. 2006); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), (3); 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.23(b)(4)(ii).
Feliz also contends that the BIA abused its discretion by
refusing to reopen the case sua sponte, in light of the exceptional
circumstances he has shown. Because there is “no legal standard
against which to judge an [administrative agency’s] decision not to
invoke its sua sponte authority,” we lack jurisdiction to consider
this claim. See Enrizquez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 246, 250
(5th Cir. 2004). Feliz’s petition for review is DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --