The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Samuel Avila-Morales' petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings, holding that equitable tolling applies and remanding the case for further proceedings.
In a memorandum decision filed January 26, 2026, the three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges W. Fletcher, Paez, and Desai reversed the BIA's decision after oral arguments held in Seattle on November 17, 2025. The case was styled as *Avila-Morales v. Bondi*, with Attorney General Pamela Bondi named as respondent.
The court exercised jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) and applied the abuse of discretion standard when reviewing the BIA's denial of Avila-Morales' motion to reopen his removal order. Under this standard, the court examines whether the BIA's decision was "arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law," citing *Avagyan v. Holder*, 646 F.3d 672, 678 (9th Cir. 2011).
The central legal issue in the case concerned the application of equitable tolling to immigration proceedings. The Ninth Circuit explained that equitable tolling may be available when "some extraordinary circumstance stood in [the petitioner's] way and prevented timely filing, and he acted with due diligence in pursuing his rights." The court cited *Hernandez-Ortiz v. Garland*, 32 F.4th 794, 801 (9th Cir. 2022), in establishing this standard.
While the opinion indicates the court found equitable tolling applicable to Avila-Morales' circumstances, the specific extraordinary circumstances that prevented timely filing are not detailed in the available portion of the memorandum decision. The court's analysis focused on whether the petitioner met the dual requirements of extraordinary circumstances and due diligence in pursuing his rights.
The decision represents a favorable outcome for Avila-Morales, who had sought to reopen his removal proceedings through the BIA. Motions to reopen in immigration cases typically must be filed within specific time limits, and when those deadlines are missed, petitioners may seek equitable tolling based on extraordinary circumstances beyond their control.
The case was designated as a memorandum decision "not for publication" and marked as not precedential except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. This designation means the decision cannot be cited as binding precedent in future cases before the Ninth Circuit, though it may be referenced for its persuasive value.
The Ninth Circuit's jurisdiction over immigration appeals is significant, as the court covers nine western states and territories and handles a substantial portion of the nation's immigration cases. The court regularly reviews BIA decisions on matters ranging from removal orders to asylum claims and motions to reopen proceedings.
Equitable tolling in immigration law serves as an important safety valve for immigrants who face removal proceedings. The doctrine allows courts to extend filing deadlines when circumstances beyond a petitioner's control prevented timely filing. Common scenarios that may warrant equitable tolling include attorney misconduct, language barriers, mental incapacity, or other extraordinary circumstances that impeded the immigrant's ability to pursue their legal rights.
The remand to the BIA means the immigration board must now reconsider Avila-Morales' motion to reopen in light of the Ninth Circuit's holding on equitable tolling. The BIA will need to apply the legal standards established by the appellate court when reviewing the underlying motion to reopen the removal proceedings.
For immigration practitioners, the decision reinforces the availability of equitable tolling in appropriate circumstances, even though this particular ruling cannot serve as binding precedent due to its unpublished status. The case demonstrates the continued importance of the Ninth Circuit's oversight role in immigration proceedings and the court's willingness to apply equitable principles when extraordinary circumstances warrant relief.
The timing of the decision, coming in early 2026 under the new administration with Pamela Bondi serving as Attorney General, reflects the ongoing nature of immigration appeals that span multiple administrations. Such cases often involve lengthy proceedings that can extend across changes in federal leadership and immigration policy priorities.
The case now returns to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with the Ninth Circuit's opinion, providing Avila-Morales with another opportunity to seek reopening of his removal proceedings under the equitable tolling framework established by the appellate court.