Bhupendra Keshavlal Amin v. Loretta E. Lynch
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Bhupendra Keshavlal Amin, a native and citizen of India, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his untimely second motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of due process violations in removal proceedings, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We review for substantial evidence findings of fact regarding counsel’s performance. Lin v. Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 1014, 1024 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Amin’s second motion to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than ninety days after the final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and the BIA reasonably determined that he failed to establish changed circumstances in India to qualify for an exception to the time limitations for a motion to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); see also Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 989-90 (9th Cir. 2010).