FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 14 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAJWINDER KAUR, a.k.a. Rajwinder No. 08-73833
Atwal,
Agency No. A075-708-722
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2011 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Rajwinder Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
*
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).
denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.
2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kaur’s motion to reopen as
untimely where the motion was filed more than a year after the BIA’s final
decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Kaur failed to establish changed
circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996
(9th Cir. 2008) (requiring movant to produce material evidence with motion to
reopen that conditions in country of nationality had changed).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-73833