NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 16 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MR. ROBINSON, AKA Robinson, AKA No. 14-70673
Fnu Robinson,
Agency No. A095-634-713
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Respondent’s motion to lift the stay of proceedings (Docket Entry No. 41) is
granted.
Robinson, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 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 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Robinson’s second motion
to reopen as untimely and number-barred where he filed it over five years after the
final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and where he failed to show
prima facie eligibility for the relief he sought, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii);
Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir. 2008) (explaining the BIA can
deny a motion to reopen based on changed country conditions for failure to
establish a prima facie case for the relief sought); Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d
1049, 1065 (9th Cir. 2009) (even under disfavored group analysis, petitioner must
present some evidence of individualized risk).
PETITON FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 14-70673