Opinion ID: 203534
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: New Country Conditions Evidence

Text: Finally, Benito claims we must reverse the BIA's ruling because the administrative tribunal refused to remand in light of new country conditions evidence. This court reviews the BIA's -9- decision on a motion to remand for abuse of discretion. Zhang v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 289, 293 (1st Cir. 2003) (citing Nascimento v. INS, 274 F.3d 26, 28 (1st Cir. 2001)). Abuse of discretion exists only where the denial was made without a 'rational explanation, inexplicably departed from the established policies, or rested on an impermissible basis.' Id. (quoting Nascimento, 274 F.3d at 28). Benito has not provided compelling evidence to demonstrate the BIA abused its discretion in denying his remand. The BIA considered Benito's evidence and concluded that it failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of a different result upon remand. We agree with the BIA that the two news articles submitted by Benito do not demonstrate a sufficient change in country conditions to warrant a remand of his case and conclude the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding that Benito failed to present evidence that likely would change the outcome of his case.