Yuliya Kancheva Yankova 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
YULIYA KANCHEVA YANKOVA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-70340
Agency No. A099-330-482
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Yuliya Kancheva Yankova, a native and citizen of Bulgaria, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of
discretion, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny
FILED
APR 24 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-70340 2
the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Yankova’s motion to
reopen because the BIA considered the evidence she submitted and acted within its
broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant
reopening. See id. at 996-97 (prior adverse credibility determination rendered
motion to reopen evidence immaterial); Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 989
(9th Cir. 2010) (evidence in motion must have “individualized relevancy”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --