Singh v. Holder , 362 F. App'x 810 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KESAR SINGH, No. 07-71960
Petitioner, Agency No. A077-800-843
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010 **
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Kesar Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
LR/Research
denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.
2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen
based on changed circumstances because the motion was filed more than ninety
days after the BIA’s 2002 order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to
present sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for the
regulatory exception to the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see
also Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004).
To the extent Singh raises contentions regarding his underlying claim for
relief, this court has already reached those issues in an earlier petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
LR/Research 2 07-71960