FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 21 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GULAM MOSTOFA, No. 09-72047
Petitioner, Agency No. A070-187-723
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2011 **
Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Gulam Mostofa, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
*
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).
abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. He v. Gonzales, 501
F.3d 1128, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Mostofa’s motion to reopen
as untimely where the motion was filed over six years after the BIA’s final
administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Mostofa failed to establish
changed circumstances in Bangladesh to qualify for the regulatory exception to the
time limitation for filing motions to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see
also Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The critical question is
. . . whether circumstances have changed sufficiently that a petitioner who
previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded fear
of future persecution.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-72047