
USCA1 Opinion

	




          March 6, 1996         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            United States Court of Appeals                                For the First Circuit                                 ____________________        No. 95-2048                JESUS A. HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Tereso Jesus Herndez-Aviles,                                     Petitioner,                                          v.                       IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,                                     Respondent.                                 ____________________                          ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER                        OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.                                           ______________                                 ____________________            Raymond E. Gillespie on brief for petitioner.            ____________________            Frank  W.  Hunger,  Assistant  Attorney General,  Civil  Division,            _________________        Richard  M. Evans, Assistant Director,  and Lorri L. Shealy, Attorney,        _________________                           _______________        U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, on brief for respondent.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Petitioner seeks  review of  the Board  of                 __________            Immigration Appeals'  (Board) denial of his  motion to reopen            deportation  proceedings.   We  have carefully  reviewed  the            record and petitioner's arguments.                   We will not  direct the Board to  reopen the proceedings            to consider petitioner's new  evidence.  Petitioner failed to            meet the basic requirement  that he present material evidence            that  was not available and could not have been discovered or            presented  at   the  former  hearing.     8  C.F.R.      3.2.            Petitioner's evidence  was available to  him and discoverable            by him at the time of the hearing.                   Petitioner  also failed  to present  a prima  facie case            showing  that he  is presently entitled  to an  adjustment of            status.   Accordingly, the Board properly  declined to remand            the  proceedings to  allow  petitioner to  apply for  such an            adjustment.  I.N.S. v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992).                          ______    _______                 The Board  adequately explained its  reasons for denying            discretionary  relief, and  we perceive  no basis  to disturb            that  decision.  Williams v. I.N.S., 773  F.2d 8, 9 (1st Cir.                             ________    ______            1985).                 The  petition for  judicial  review is  denied.   Loc.R.                                                         ______            27.1.                                         -2-
