Jootje Johanes Kambey 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOOTJE JOHANES KAMBEY,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70220
Agency No. A095-630-202
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 24, 2013**
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Jootje Johanes Kambey, a native and citizen of Indonesia, 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
FILED
SEP 27 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-70220 2
review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, Najmabadi
v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kambey’s motion to reopen
as untimely because the motion was filed over three years after the BIA’s final
administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Kambey failed to
demonstrate changed circumstances in Indonesia to qualify for the regulatory
exception to the time limitation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597
F.3d at 988-89 (evidence of changed circumstances must be qualitatively different
from evidence that could have been presented at prior hearing).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --