Man Pan v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

Man Li Pan, a native and citizen of China and the mother of two U.S.-born children, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying her untimely motion to reopen removal proceedings based on changed country conditions. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and review the BIA decision for an abuse of discretion. Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition.-

Although Pan contends that she was justified in filing an untimely motion, she fails to establish that country conditions related to China’s family planning program, including its “one-child” policy, have changed since her original asylum application in 2000. Generally, “[a]n alien must file a motion to reopen within ninety days of the date of entry of a final order of removal. However, ‘[t]here is no time limit on the filing of a motion to reopen’ for asylum applications ‘based on changed country conditions arising in the country of nationality or the country to which removal has been ordered.’” Feng Gui Lin v. Holder, 588 F.3d 981, 985 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal citation omitted) (quoting 8 U.S.C.’ § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii)); see also 8 C.F.R. §…