Mouhanna

Mouhanna v. Holder

Good Law
318 F. App'x 509
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 9, 2009No. 08-74692California266 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s second motion to reopen removal proceedings.

We review the BIA’s ruling on a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir.2008).

Petitioner’s motion to reopen to apply for asylum failed to present evidence of changed country conditions in Lebanon that is material to petitioner and his circumstances. See § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii). Because petitioner failed to meet his burden of establishing a prima facie asylum claim to support reopening, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s second motion to reopen as untimely and numerically barred. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(A), (C)(i); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2).

Accordingly, respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted in part because the questions raised by this petition are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).

As to the BIA’s denial of sua sponte reopening, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s…

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.