FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 29 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JIAN FANG WANG, No. 09-70681
Petitioner, Agency No. A076-279-132
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.
Jian Fang Wang, native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal
proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
*
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).
We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de
novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Mohammed v.
Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Wang’s motion to reopen
because the motion was filed more than nine years after the IJ’s December 15,
1998, order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii) , and Wang failed to establish that he
warranted equitable tolling of the 180-day filing deadline, see Iturribarria v. INS,
321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003) (deadline can be equitably tolled when a
petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as
the petitioner acts with due diligence).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-70681