Lixia Chen v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LIXIA CHEN,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72449
Agency No. A087-608-279
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Lixia Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’(“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal
proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
NOV 23 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 denial of a motion to reopen, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983,
986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Chen’s motion to reopen,
where the BIA considered the record and acted within its broad discretion in
determining that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate prima facie
eligibility for the relief sought. See id. (the BIA may deny a motion to reopen
based on failure to show prima facie eligibility for the relief sought). Contrary to
Chen’s contention, the BIA did not hold her to an impermissibly high legal
standard. See Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008) (petitioner
bears the burden of proving the evidence would likely change the result in the
case).
In light of this disposition, we do not reach Chen’s remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72449 2

-- 2 of 2 --