FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 13 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZHIYAN JIN, No. 12-72654
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-292-975
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 5, 2015**
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges and CHHABRIA,***
District Judge.
*
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).
***
The Honorable Vince G. Chhabria, United States District Judge for
the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.
Petitioner Zhiyan Jin is a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of
China. Jin petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”)
order denying her petition for asylum.
An application for asylum must be filed within one year of the alien’s arrival
in the United States. The alien has the burden of proving by clear and convincing
evidence that the application was timely filed. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B). The
Immigration Judge (“IJ”) found that Jin had not met this burden and the BIA
agreed.
This court lacks jurisdiction to review the IJ’s or BIA’s finding that an
asylum application is untimely. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3). While we retain
jurisdiction to review the agency’s timeliness-related rulings where the alien raises
a question of law or constitutional claim, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), Singh v.
Holder, 649 F.3d 1161, 1164 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc), Jin raises neither.
The petition for review is DENIED.
2