Surinder Singh v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NHY/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SURINDER SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72383
Agency No. A072-685-868
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Surinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen proceedings held in absentia. We
FILED
JAN 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NHY/Research 07-72383 2
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Lara-
Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir. 2004), we deny the petition for
review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s second motion to
reopen because he failed to demonstrate the evidence he submitted was previously
unavailable. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(3); Bhasin v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 984
(9th Cir. 2005).
Petitioner’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --