Karmjit Grewal v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Karmjit Singh Grewal, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. 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 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 Grewal’s untimely motion to reopen because it considered the record and acted within its discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility for the relief sought. See Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 995-97 (9th Cir.2008) (requiring movant to establish prima facie eligibility for relief and discussing consequences of lack of credibility); Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 771 (9th Cir.2011).

In light of our conclusion, we do not reach Grewal’s contention regarding a lack of time limits for filing a motion to reopen to apply for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). We reject Grewal’s contention that the agency did not…