Lakhwinder Singh v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 20 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LAKHWINDER SINGH, No. 08-73950 Petitioner, Agency No. A077-815-179 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 12, 2011 ** Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. Lakhwinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 * 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). F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed over two years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to present sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for an exception to the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996-97. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to reopen removal proceedings sua sponte to reconsider the agency’s adverse credibility determination. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. . 2 08-73950