NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEP 27 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
MANJIT SINGH, No. 11-73218
Petitioner, Agency No. A076-359-587
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
September 24, 2013 **
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Manjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order 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, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005),
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
and we deny the petition for review......................................................................
In In his opening brief, Singh fails to raise, and therefore has waived, any
challenge to the BIA’s dispositive determination that his motion to reopen was
untimely. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011). In light of
this disposition, we need not reach Singh’s remaining challenges to the BIA’s
denial of his motion to reopen.
Singh’s contention that the BIA should have remanded his case to the
immigration judge in 2006 while his second visa petition was pending is without
merit because he did not request that the BIA remand for that purpose until 2011.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73218