NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 08 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
WEN-YING QIU, Chao-Ying Li, No. 12-70961
Petitioner, Agency No. A072-938-036
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 4, 2016**
Seattle, Washington
Before: KOZINSKI, O’SCANNLAIN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Wen-Ying Qiu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’s denial of her second motion to reopen. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We defer to the Board’s discretion unless it
acted “arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law.” 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) (citing Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.
2002)).
The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Qiu’s motion as time- and
number-barred. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). Qiu
contends that conditions in China regarding the persecution of Christians have
changed sufficiently since her original hearing to render her eligible for a statutory
exception to these requirements. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii). But the
country reports and other documents Qiu submitted indicate only a continuation of
country conditions, and do not demonstrate that Qiu is more likely to be persecuted
for her newfound beliefs. Because the record amply supports the BIA’s decision,
Qiu’s petition for review is
DENIED.
2