Chien Hwa Shen v. JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHIEN HWA SHEN,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-72626
Agency No. A072-969-159
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Chien Hwa Shen, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se 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
an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597
F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 23 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 11-72626
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Shen’s motion as untimely
and number-barred where Shen filed his third motion to reopen more than seven
years after the final administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Shen
failed to demonstrate he qualified for a regulatory exception to the time and
number limits for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also
Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 991 (concluding that evidence submitted with motion to
reopen did not establish changed circumstances arising within the country of
nationality); cf. Chandra v. Holder, 751 F.3d 1034, 1037 (9th Cir. 2014)
(concluding that an alien can satisfy 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii) by presenting
“evidence of changed country conditions that are relevant in light of the
petitioner’s changed circumstances”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --