Mohmmed Enamul Bhuiyan Haq 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MOHMMED ENAMUL BHUIYAN
HAQ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71697
Agency No. A071-575-736
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Mohmmed Enamul Bhuiyan Haq, a native and citizen of Bangladesh,
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
FILED
OCT 12 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71697 2
abuse of discretion the BIA’s 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 Haq’s untimely motion to
reopen because he did not establish changed circumstances in Bangladesh material
to his claims to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Almaraz v. Holder, 608 F.3d 638, 640-41 (9th Cir. 2010)
(petitioner failed to show passage of trade agreement was material to his claim
where documents he submitted were inconclusive, even if accepted as true).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --