Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Danis Reyes v. Matthew G. Whitaker, 17-3707 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 17-3707 Visitors: 21
Filed: Feb. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-3707 _ Danis Flaudia Reyes lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Matthew G. Whitaker, Acting Attorney General of the United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals _ Submitted: February 4, 2019 Filed: February 7, 2019 [Unpublished] _ Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Guatemalan citizen Danis Flaudia Reyes petitions for review of
More
                 United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 17-3707
                        ___________________________

                               Danis Flaudia Reyes

                             lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

                                           v.

 Matthew G. Whitaker, Acting Attorney General of the United States of America

                            lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
                                    ____________

                      Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals
                                  ____________

                           Submitted: February 4, 2019
                             Filed: February 7, 2019
                                  [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Guatemalan citizen Danis Flaudia Reyes petitions for review of an order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying her motion to reopen her removal
proceedings.
       After careful review, we conclude that the BIA’s denial was not an abuse of its
discretion. See Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey, 
551 F.3d 775
, 785 (8th Cir. 2008)
(standard of review); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (“A motion to reopen proceedings shall
not be granted unless it appears to the Board that evidence sought to be offered is
material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the
former hearing . . . .”). We deny the petition.
                         ______________________________




                                         -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer