Castillo vs. INS, (5th Cir. 2003)

Text

---

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .

R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-60170 Summary Calendar FRANCISCO ANTONIO CASTILLO, Petitioner, versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (A28 343 270) January 10, 2003 Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Francisco Antonio Castillo (“Castillo”) has filed a petition for review of a final order of the Board of Imm igration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the denia l of Castillo’s motion to reopen his deportation proceeding. Castillo was ordered deported i n absentia on May 13, 198 8, when he failed to appear for his deportation hearing.

G:\screener\02-60170.opn.wpd Co ntrary to Castillo’s assertion, the BIA did not determine that the motion to reopen was untimely; the BIA denied the motion on the basis that Castillo did not establish “reasonable cause” for his failure to attend the hearing. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. S ee Lara v. Trominski , 216 F.3d 487 (5th Cir. 2000); United States v. Estrada-Trochez , 66 F.3d 733, 735-36 (5th Cir. 1995). To the extent that the BIA determined that Castillo’s request for substantive relief in the form of an adjustment of status was untimel y, Castillo asserts only that he would have filed a ti mely motion for relief had he been given proper notice of the deportation order. Inasmuch as he has not shown that the notice was improper, this argument is without merit.

PETITION DENIED.

---