Case ID: f-appx_400/html/0299-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dilbag SINGH, a.k.a. Dilbagh Singh, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-72427.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 19, 2010.
    
    Filed Oct. 25, 2010.
    Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Law Offices of Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Burlingame, CA, for Petitioner.
    Thomas Fatouros, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, Arthur Leonid Rabin, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of The District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Dilbag Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his 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, Singh v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir.2007), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Singh’s motion to reopen because the motion was filed almost 10 years after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh did not show that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Singh, 491 F.3d at 1096-97.

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