Suntari Sri v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Good Law
470 F. App'x 616
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 2, 201209-70673California246 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Suntari Sri and her family, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed over four years after the BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish changed circumstances in Indonesia to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); see also Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004) (“The critical question is ... whether circumstances have changed sufficiently that a petitioner who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded fear of future persecution.”).

We lack jurisdiction to review petitioners’ contention that the disfavored group analysis applies to the changed circumstances exception to the time limit…

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.