Opinion
No. 06-75757.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed August 14, 2009.
Homayun Zadeh, Esq., Law Office of Homayun Zadeh, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Marshall Tamor Golding, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A078-677-109.
Before: KLEINFELD, M. SMITH, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Mariya Georgieva Stoilova, a native and citizen of Bulgaria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying her motion to re-open removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion, Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Stoilova's motion to reopen where the motion was untimely filed, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Stoilova failed to present sufficient evidence of materially changed circumstances in Bulgaria to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1133 (9th Cir. 2007). We reject Stoilova's contentions that the BIA gave improper weight to her documentary evidence and failed to adequately explain its reason for denying the motion. See Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1430-31 (9th Cir. 1995).