FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 20 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FENG CHEN, No. 12-70164
Petitioner, Agency No. A078-745-736
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted October 9, 2014
Portland, Oregon
Before: FISHER, CHRISTEN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Feng Chen petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (BIA) denying his untimely motion to reopen his 2002 removal
proceeding. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
BIA’s decision on a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Kucana v. Holder,
558 U.S. 233, 242 (2010).
Chen claims that the BIA erred in failing to evaluate his evidence of China’s
changed country conditions in light of his changed personal circumstances. In
support of his claim, Chen presented his sworn affidavit, which arguably could
show that he faced increased threats of persecution due to his political activities
beginning in 2010. When the BIA denied Chen’s motion, it did not have the
benefit of our decision in Chandra v. Holder, which clarified that a motion to
reopen may be justified when changed country conditions are made relevant by a
change in petitioner’s personal circumstances. 751 F.3d 1034, 1038-39 (9th Cir.
2014). Therefore, we remand to give the agency the chance to determine the
impact of this intervening decision on its evaluation of Chen’s claim that changed
country conditions justify reopening his removal proceeding, and for further
proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-
18 (2002) (per curiam) (recommending remand to the BIA to address matters
entrusted by law to the agency that were not considered in the first instance).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED.