Case Information
*1 Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.
Pedro Rodriguez-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen and reconsider. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse *2 of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen and a motion to reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales , 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We review de novo questions of law. Bonilla v. Lynch , 840 F.3d 575, 581 (9th Cir. 2016). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Rodriguez- Garcia’ s motion to reopen and reconsider as untimely, where he filed the motion more than 4 years after the order of removal became final and Rodriguez-Garcia failed to demonstrate that he met the requirements for equitable tolling. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.2(b)(2), (c)(2); see also Avagyan v. Holder , 646 F.3d 672, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2011) (discussing the circumstances in which a movant may be entitled to equitable tolling).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Rodriguez- Garcia’s motion to reopen and reconsider where his challenges to the agency ’ s jurisdiction under Pereira v. Sessions , ––– U.S. –––– , 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), fail under Karingithi v. Whitaker , 913 F.3d 1158, 1160-62 (9th Cir. 2019).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate. The motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 19-71735
[*] 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).