Case ID: f-appx_421/html/0719-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Francisco Noyola HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 09-70374.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 8, 2011.
    
    Filed March 15, 2011.
    Francisco Noyola Hernandez, Santa Ana, CA, pro se.
    Lisa Damiano, Trial, 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: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Francisco Noyola Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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, 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 Hernandez’s motion to reopen as untimely and successive because he filed his second motion to reopen over 20 months after the BIA’s final administrative decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and because Hernandez failed to demonstrate changed country conditions to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and numerical limits for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Lin v. Holder, 588 F.3d 981, 986, 986-989 (9th Cir.2009).

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