Agus Widada v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 551 F. App'x 403 ( 2013 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 9 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AGUS WIDADA, No. 12-71162
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-634-567
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Agus Widada, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder,
597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Widada’s motion to reopen
as untimely because the motion was filed nearly four years after the BIA’s final
administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Widada failed to establish a
prima facie case for relief, see Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 986; Halim v. Holder, 590
F.3d 971, 978 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[E]ven where an applicant has shown membership
in a disfavored group, he or she must still present some evidence of individualized
risk.”). We reject Widada’s contention that the BIA rejected evidence “out of
hand,” or that the BIA otherwise abused its discretion in denying his motion.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 12-71162