Case ID: f-appx_540/html/0552-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harpreet KAUR, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-71539.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Sept. 26, 2013.
    
    Saad Ahmad, Fremont, CA, for Petitioner.
    Jason Wisecup, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Harpreet Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir.2011), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kaur’s motion to reopen as untimely where it was filed nine years after her final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and she failed to establish that she qualified for equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 679-80 (equitable tolling is available to a petitioner who establishes that he suffered from deception, fraud or error, and exercised due diligence in discovering such circumstances).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.