### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCUIT

No. 11-60679 Summary Calendar

DE-MEI ZHANG, also known as De Mei Zhang,
Petitioner

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A070 072 464

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * De-Mei Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Im m i gr ati o n Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reope n h i s i mmigration proceeding. He argues that the BIA abused its discretion when it ruled that he had not established changed country conditions sufficient t o warrant consideration of his untimely motion to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c). U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D July 26, 2 012 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-60679 Document: 00511934334 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/26/2012No. 11-60679

A highly deferential abuse of discretion standard applies to review of the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Zhao v. Gonzales , 404 F.3d 295, 303 (5th Cir. 2005). “Such discretion is n o t t o b e disturbed so long as it is not capricious, racially invidious, utterly without foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so aberrational that it is arbitrary rather than the result of any perceptible rational approach.” Ma nza n o - Garcia v. Gonzales , 413 F.3d 462, 469 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Motions for reopening immigration p r o c eedings are disfavored because, generally, every delay enures to the advantage of the dep ortable alien. INS v. Doherty , 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). Ordinarily, such motions “must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding s o u gh t to be reopened.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). However, th e above time limitation does not apply to a motion to reopen proceedings based on “cha n g e d circumstances arising in the country of

n ati o nality or in the country to which deportation has been ordered, if such evidence is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the previous hearing.” § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii). Noting that he presented evidence that he is the father of two children, one of which was born after he left China, Zhang ass e rt s th at h e is now subject to persecution in China because he is in violation of that country’s family planning polic y . S u c h a self-induced change in personal circumstances, however, is distinguishable from changed country conditions, and provides n o evidence of changed conditions in China. See Huang v. Holder , 358 F. App’x. 587, 588 (5th Cir. 2009). Zhang further co ntends that he presented documentary evidence demonstrating the Ch i n e s e government’s enforcement of the family planning policy and its crackdo w n on persons practicing the Christian faith. In determining whether evidence accompanying a motion to reopen demonstrates

a material change in country conditions that would justify reopening, the BIA
2 Case: 11-60679 Document: 00511934334 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/26/2012No. 11-60679

compares the “evidence of country conditions submitted with the motion to those that existed a t th e time of the merits hearing below.” In re S–Y–G , 24 I. & N. Dec. 247, 253 (BIA 2007). The evidence presented by Zhang focuses on China’s recent practices with respe c t to persons who violate the family planning laws, or who practice Christianity. Zhang has not pointed to evidence of record that demonstrates a material change in country conditions since his merits hearing. He has therefore failed to show that the BIA abused its discretion in denying his motion to reopen. See Zhao, 404 F.3d at 303. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

3 Case: 11-60679 Document: 00511934334 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/26/2012