Court Opinion

ID: 8464191
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 08:17:22.78722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:12.062413
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM **
Dalsher Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen. 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), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed over two years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to present sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir.2008) (underlying adverse credibility determination rendered evidence of changed circumstances immaterial).
To the extent Singh contends the BIA failed to consider some or all of the evidence he submitted with the motion to reopen, he has not overcome the presumption that the BIA did review the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir.2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.