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NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 16 2011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
AHMAD ALI, No. 09-70221
Petitioner, Agency No. A075-318-158
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.
Ahmad Ali, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal
proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
*
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).
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983,
986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Ali’s motion to reopen as
untimely because he filed the motion nearly four years after the BIA issued its final
order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and he failed to present sufficient
evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for an exception to the time
limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).
Ali’s contention that the BIA applied an improper legal standard in denying
his motion to reopen is belied by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-70221