Sukhnand Singh; v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SUKHNAND SINGH; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-73833
Agency Nos. A098-150-769
A098-150-770
A098-150-771
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 22, 2015**
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Sukhnand Singh, a native and citizen of India, and his family petition for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion
to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
JUL 07 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

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 petitioners’ untimely motion
to reopen because they did not establish material changed circumstances in India to
qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 988-89 (petitioner’s evidence was not
“qualitatively different” because it described conditions similar to those in
evidence at the prior proceedings). We reject petitioners’ contention that the BIA
failed to properly consider their evidence.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-73833 2

-- 2 of 2 --