Opinion ID: 200850
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Changed Circumstances Claim

Text: 14 Next, Betouche contends that the BIA erred in rejecting his motion to reopen the deportation proceedings, given that conditions in Algeria had deteriorated significantly between August 1998 and April 2002. 9 By way of proof, Betouche points to a 2001 State Department Human Rights Report, as well as recent [newspaper] articles and affidavits, to demonstrate that serious political unrest persisted in Algeria, thus allegedly exposing Betouche to an increased risk of being targeted by Islamic fundamentalists in the event he were to return to Algeria. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6)(C)(ii) (allowing filing of motions to reopen beyond 90 days from final judgment of deportation where alien adduces material evidence, unavailable to him at the time of his asylum, that conditions in native country have changed). We find no abuse of discretion in the BIA denial. See Zhang, 348 F.3d at 292. 15 Betouche included none of the above-described reports, articles, and affidavits in the administrative record before the BIA. Thus, even if Betouche were to have produced these materials on the instant appeal (which he did not), they could not be considered. See Fesseha, 333 F.3d at 18. In their stead, we simply have Betouche's uncorroborated assertions that those materials would demonstrate that the human rights situation in Algeria remained poor ... and serious problems persisted.  (Emphasis added.) Rather than demonstrating any alleged change-in-country circumstances, these bald assertions severely undermine Betouche's position, by suggesting exactly the opposite ( viz., that the same conditions have been continuing ever since 1998). As such, these statements constitute a further attempt to relitigate the merits of the asylum claim rejected in 1998. 16 Accordingly, the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals is hereby AFFIRMED.