Jaspreet Singh v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JASPREET SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72474
Agency No. A096-169-770
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Jaspreet Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, Najambadi v.
* 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).
FILED
NOV 24 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 13-72474
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 Singh’s motion to reopen
because it was filed more than five years after his order of removal became final,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to establish materially changed
circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time
limitations for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najambadi, 597
F.3d at 987-90 (evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening);
see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir. 2007) (evidence was
immaterial in light of prior adverse credibility determination).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --