Erwin Mambo 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ERWIN MAMBO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70502
Agency No. A093-321-535
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.
Erwin Mambo, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
FILED
APR 26 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-70502
denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir.
2010). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Mambo’s untimely motion
to reopen because Mambo failed to establish changed circumstances in Indonesia
to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation. See 8 C.F.R. §
1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 989-90.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --