FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 16 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YUHUAN JIN, No. 08-72438
Petitioner, Agency No. A096-048-546
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 11, 2011 **
Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Yuhuan Jin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her 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). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Jin’s motion to reopen as
untimely because she filed the motion almost three years after the BIA’s final
removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to present sufficient
evidence to qualify for the changed country conditions exception, see 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(g)(1) (“A motion and any submission
made in conjunction with a motion must be in English or accompanied by a
certified English translation.”); Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996 (evidence of changed
conditions must be “material”).
We lack jurisdiction to review Jin’s challenge to the agency’s underlying
adverse credibility determination. See Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 995.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 08-72438