Case Name: RUIDE ZHEN, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-05
Citations: 276 F. App'x 713
Docket Number: No. 05-74246
Parties: RUIDE ZHEN, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 276
Pages: 713–714

Head Matter:
RUIDE ZHEN, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-74246.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 22, 2008.
Filed May 5, 2008.
Danning Jiang, Esq., Law Offices of Danning Jiang, San Jose, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Portland, OR, Lisa M. Arnold, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Respondent.
Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ruide Zhen, native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings in order to apply for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Zhen's motion to reopen because he did not present any new, previously unavailable evidence to warrant reopening of the proceedings. See id. at 785.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.