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NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 21 2011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
JULIO CESAR MORENO-HEREDIA, No. 09-72427
Petitioner, Agency No. A079-543-611
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.
Julio Cesar Moreno-Heredia, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his third
motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen.
*
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).
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 in denying Moreno-Heredia’s third
motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred where the motion was filed
nearly five years after the BIA’s final administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. §
1003.2(c)(2), and Moreno Heredia failed to establish changed circumstances in
Peru to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and numerical bar 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 09-72427