FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 20 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OLUSEGUN OLUWOLE OSHILAJA, No. 10-72830
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-364-379
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 1, 2013 **
Before: GRABER, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Olusegun Oluwole Oshilaja, a native and citizen of Nigeria, 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
*
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).
review for abuse of 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 Oshilaja’s motion to reopen
as untimely where Oshilaja filed the motion more than two years after the BIA’s
final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to show materially
changed country conditions in Nigeria that would excuse the late filing, see 8
C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.
2004) (requiring circumstances to “have changed sufficiently that a petitioner who
previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded fear
of future persecution”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 10-72830