Case ID: f-appx_552/html/0761-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HAI LE HUANG, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-72796.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 21, 2014.
    
    Filed Jan. 23, 2014.
    Gary J. Yerman, Esquire, Yerman & Associates, New York, NY, for Petitioner.
    Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Edward Earl Wiggers, Esquire, U.S. Department Of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    
      Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Hai Le Huang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1130-31 (9th Cir.2007), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Huang’s second untimely motion to reopen because it considered the record evidence and exercised its broad discretion in determining Huang failed to establish materially changed country conditions in China to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and number limits for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.2(c)(1), (c)(3)(h); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir.2008) (setting forth the requirements for demonstrating changed country conditions in support of a motion to reopen).

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.