Zhi Qin Hong, a.k.a. Miss Sala Klomkliang 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZHI QIN HONG, a.k.a. Miss Sala
Klomkliang,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74232
Agency No. A075-467-736
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Zhi Qin Hong, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74232 2
abuse of 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 Hong’s motion to reopen as
untimely where it was filed eight years after the BIA’s final administrative
decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Hong failed to establish changed
circumstances in China to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time
limitation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988,
996 (9th Cir. 2008) (evidence must demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief in
order to reopen proceedings based on changed country conditions).
Hong’s contention that the BIA failed to consider the evidence submitted
with the motion to reopen fails, because she has not overcome the presumption that
the BIA reviewed the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th
Cir. 2006).
Hong’s contentions that the BIA applied improper standards of law in
denying her motion to reopen are belied by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --