Case ID: f-appx_466/html/0677-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Majar SINGH, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-74820.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 17, 2012.
    
    Filed Jan. 24, 2012.
    Babak Pourtavoosi, Pannun The Firm, P.C., Jackson Heights, NY, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Kathleen Kelly Volkert, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Offiee of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Majar Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his third motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of discretion, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s third motion to reopen because it considered the evidence submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining Singh did not demonstrate prima facie eligibility for the relief sought. See INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 104-05, 108 S.Ct. 904, 99 L.Ed.2d 90 (1988) (the BIA may deny a motion to reopen for failure to establish a prima facie case for the underlying relief sought).

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