FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 24 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE DANIEL MACEDO-CAMPOS, No. 12-74108
Petitioner, Agency No. A078-988-682
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 17, 2015**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Jose Daniel Macedo-Campos, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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 BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d
*
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).
983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Macedo-Campos’s untimely
motion to reopen because he did not establish materially changed circumstances in
Mexico to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 990 (evidence lacked materiality
because it simply recounted “generalized conditions” in country that did not show
petitioner’s situation was “appreciably different from the dangers faced by her
fellow citizens”).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua
sponte authority to reopen proceedings. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d
818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 12-74108