NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 22 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LINO PLAYAS-SERRANO, AKA Lino No. 19-70952 Playas Serrano, AKA Juan Carlos Salgado, Agency No. A200-154-205 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 19, 2021** Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Lino Playas-Serrano, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Perez v. Mukasey, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Playas-Serrano’s untimely and number barred motion to reopen based on changed country conditions where he failed to establish prima facie eligibility for relief. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), (3)(ii); Ramirez-Munoz v. Lynch, 816 F.3d 1226, 1228 (9th Cir. 2016) (“A motion to reopen will not be granted unless the respondent establishes a prima facie case of eligibility for the underlying relief sought.”); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). We lack jurisdiction to consider Playas-Serrano’s claim based on his family’s landownership and his eligibility for CAT relief. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to consider claims not raised to BIA). We reject as unsupported by the record Playas-Serrano’s contentions that the BIA ignored evidence or otherwise erred in its analysis of his motion. The stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part, DISMISSED in part. 2 19-70952 19-70952 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Lino Playas-Serrano v. Merrick Garland 22 July 2021 Agency Unpublished 2b5bcb60ac6936169c9dd511b598fe3f07338467
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals