Thongla Thepmanivong 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
THONGLA THEPMANIVONG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74827
Agency No. A029-267-822
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2010**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Thongla Thepmanivong, a native and citizen of Laos, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of
FILED
DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74827 2
discretion, He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny
the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Thepmanivong’s motion to
reopen as untimely because it was filed more than fourteen years after the BIA’s
final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Thepmanivong failed to establish
grounds for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 894, 897 (9th Cir.
2003), or to establish material changed country conditions in Laos, see 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir. 2008).
Thepmanivong’s remaining contentions are not persuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --