WEN-YING QIU, Chao-Ying Li v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WEN-YING QIU, Chao-Ying Li,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70961
Agency No. A072-938-036
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 4, 2016**
Seattle, Washington
Before: KOZINSKI, O’SCANNLAIN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Wen-Ying Qiu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’s denial of her second motion to reopen. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We defer to the Board’s discretion unless it
acted “arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law.” Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d
FILED
FEB 08 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.
2002)).
The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Qiu’s motion as time- and
number-barred. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). Qiu
contends that conditions in China regarding the persecution of Christians have
changed sufficiently since her original hearing to render her eligible for a statutory
exception to these requirements. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii). But the
country reports and other documents Qiu submitted indicate only a continuation of
country conditions, and do not demonstrate that Qiu is more likely to be persecuted
for her newfound beliefs. Because the record amply supports the BIA’s decision,
Qiu’s petition for review is
DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --