From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singh v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 498
Aug 1, 2008
286 F. App'x 497 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-70143.

Submitted July 22, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed August 1, 2008.

Teresa Salazar, Law Offices of Martin Resendez Guajardo, A Professional Corporation, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Colette J. Winston, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A76-336-807.

Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

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


Gurpal Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh's motion to reopen as untimely because it was filed almost two years after the BIA issued its final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing motions to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Singh v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 498
Aug 1, 2008
286 F. App'x 497 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Singh v. Mukasey

Case Details

Full title:Gurpal SINGH, Petitioner, Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 498

Date published: Aug 1, 2008

Citations

286 F. App'x 497 (9th Cir. 2008)