Akop Dzhulakyan 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
AKOP DZHULAKYAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 05-77431
Agency No. A027-668-198
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Akop Dzhulakyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, 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
FILED
JUN 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

05-77431 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d
770, 773 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Dzhulakyan’s motion
because he failed to establish prima facie eligibility for withholding of removal and
relief under the Convention Against Torture. See Mendez-Gutierrez v. Gonzales,
444 F.3d 1168, 1171 (9th Cir. 2006) (prima facie eligibility is established “where
the evidence reveals a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for
relief have been satisfied”). Contrary to Dzhulakyan’s contention, the BIA
adequately considered the evidence he submitted with his motion. See Ghaly v.
INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1430-31 (9th Cir. 1995).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --