Case Name: Marina Del Rosario Lima JACOBO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-01-23
Citations: 590 F. App'x 704
Docket Number: No. 11-71726
Parties: Marina Del Rosario Lima JACOBO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: PAEZ and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges, and CHRISTENSEN, Chief District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 590
Pages: 704–705

Head Matter:
Marina Del Rosario Lima JACOBO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 11-71726.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Nov. 21, 2014.
Filed Jan. 23, 2015.
Judith L. Wood, Esquire, Law Office of Judith L. Wood and Jesse Moorman, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Oil, David H. Wetmore, Mona Maria Yousif, Trial, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ-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: PAEZ and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges, and CHRISTENSEN, Chief District Judge.
The Honorable Dana L. Christensen, Chief District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner Marina Del Rosario Lima Ja-cobo petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") denial of her third motion to reopen. For the reasons stated below, we deny the petition.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Petitioner failed to demonstrate materially changed country conditions for women in Guatemala. The evidence Petitioner submitted with her most recent motion to reopen showed' that the conditions described had existed for years in Guatemala and failed to introduce previously unavailable evidence showing a material change in conditions in Guatemala since the time of Petitioner's 2002 hearing. 8 C.F.R.' § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii). Thus, Petitioner's third motion to reopen is both untimely and number barred. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.