Rajesh Dutt v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Good Law
444 F. App'x 210
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 21, 201110-70113California235 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Rajesh Dutt and Lata Rashmin Dutt, natives and citizens of Fiji, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely where it was filed more than 90 days after the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i), and petitioners failed to demonstrate changed country conditions to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); cf. Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004). Therefore, petitioners’ due process rights were not violated. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring error for a due process violation).

We do not consider the extra-record evidence submitted for the first time with petitioners’ opening brief because…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.