FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 03 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GIDEON SAHAT PERWIRA No. 12-71271
SIHOTANG,
Agency No. A078-020-208
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 23, 2014**
Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Gideon Sahat Perwira Sihotang, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597
*
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 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Sihotang’s second motion
to reopen as untimely and number-barred, where Sihotang filed the motion six
years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to
establish materially changed circumstances in Indonesia to qualify for the
regulatory exception to the time and number limitations, see id. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii);
Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987-89 (evidence of changed circumstances must be
qualitatively different from what could have been presented at prior hearing).
We lack jurisdiction to consider the BIA’s discretionary decision not to
reopen proceedings sua sponte pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Mejia-
Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011); see also Matter of G-
D-, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1132, 1135 (BIA 1999) (BIA’s consideration of whether a
fundamental change in the law warrants reopening involves an exercise of its sua
sponte authority).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 12-71271