Zatikyan

MEMORANDUM **

Suren Zatikyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings based on changed country conditions. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004), we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.

The BIA abused its discretion in denying Zatikyan’s motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred because a motion to reopen based on changed country conditions is exempt from the time and numerical limitations. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); Malty, 381 F.3d at 945 .

The BIA also abused its discretion in concluding that Zatikyan failed to show “changed circumstances” because he submitted new evidence that, if taken as true, demonstrates a “reasonable likelihood” that he now has a well-founded fear of future persecution. See Malty, 381 F.3d at 947 (facts presented in a motion to reopen must be accepted as true unless inherently unbelievable). The BIA’s observation that Zatikyan has “essentially made the same arguments he made at trial and on appeal” is…