Case Name: Feng CUI, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-28
Citations: 430 F. App'x 567
Docket Number: No. 09-72721
Parties: Feng CUI, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 430
Pages: 567–568

Head Matter:
Feng CUI, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-72721.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 20, 2011.
Filed April 28, 2011.
Feng Cui, Monterey Park, CA, pro se.
Gerald Alexander, William Clark Minick, 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: RYMER, THOMAS, 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).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Feng Cui, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's denial of his motion to reopen proceedings held in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Hamazaspyan v. Holder, 590 F.3d 744, 747 (9th Cir.2009), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion by denying Cui's motion to reopen because it considered the evidence Cui submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA's denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is "arbitrary, irrational, and contrary to law").
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.