Rene Dimas Salazar v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

10-73265Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit1 mar 2013

Testo completo

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RENE DIMAS SALAZAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73265
Agency No. A088-735-521
ORDER
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Salazar’s petition for panel rehearing is granted.
The memorandum disposition filed on October 29, 2012, is withdrawn. A
replacement memorandum disposition is being filed concurrently with this order.
Salazar’s petition for rehearing en banc is denied as moot.
Any petition for rehearing of the replacement memorandum disposition must
be filed within 45 days of the filing date of this order.
FILED
MAR 01 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RENE DIMAS SALAZAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73265
Agency No. A088-735-521
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 29, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Rene Dimas Salazar, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings
conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
MAR 01 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 2 of 3 --

10-73265 2
for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Perez v. Mukasey, 516
F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008). Upon review of all of the circumstances in this
case, we conclude that Salazar did not fail to appear for his August 2009 hearing.
See id. at 774. We therefore grant the petition for review and remand for further
proceedings.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.