Daljit 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).
JK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DALJIT SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73957
Agency No. A095-584-969
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Daljit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal
proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
FEB 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JK/Research 07-73957 2
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894
(9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as
untimely where the motion was filed over three years after the BIA’s final
decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to establish changed
circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996
(9th Cir. 2008) (requiring movant to produce material evidence with motion to
reopen that conditions in the country of nationality had changed).
Singh’s contention that the BIA failed to consider the evidence submitted
with the motion to reopen fails, because he has not overcome the presumption that
the BIA did review the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th
Cir. 2006). Singh’s contention that the BIA failed to explain its reasons for its
decision to deny the motion to reopen is belied by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --