Alvaro Lozano-Vega v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Kermit E. Bye and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4387040] [15-1498]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-1498 ___________________________ Alvaro Lozano-Vega lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: April 1, 2016 Filed: April 11, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Mexican citizen Alvaro Lozano-Vega petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his untimely request to reopen his case based on changed country conditions–an order that we review under a highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. See Martinez v. Lynch, 785 F.3d 1262, 1264-65 (8th Cir. 2015); Averianova v. Holder, 592 F.3d 932, 936 (8th Cir. 2010). Appellate Case: 15-1498 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/11/2016 Entry ID: 4387040 The BIA carefully considered Lozano-Vega’s supporting evidence, but was not persuaded that the evidence, some of which was previously available, showed changed country conditions that would affect Lozano-Vega’s previously expressed fear of returning to Mexico. See Averianova, 592 F.3d at 936-37. We cannot conclude that the BIA’s decision was an abuse of discretion, see Zhong Qin Zheng v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 893, 895-96 (8th Cir. 2008); and having considered the other arguments in the supporting brief, we conclude that none of them provides a basis to grant the petition before us. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 15-1498 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/11/2016 Entry ID: 4387040

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?