Reynaldo Enrique Jimenez- Morataya v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
REYNALDO ENRIQUE JIMENEZ-
MORATAYA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-70664
Agency No. A094-933-002
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 24, 2016**
Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Reynaldo Enrique Jimenez-Morataya, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions pro se 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
FILED
JUN 24 2016
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 --

reopen. Lin v. Holder, 588 F.3d 981, 984 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Jimenez-Morataya’s motion
to reopen as untimely, where the motion was filed more than a year after the BIA’s
final order, and Jimenez-Morataya failed to present sufficient evidence of changed
circumstances in El Salvador to qualify for the regulatory exception to the filing
deadline. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), (c)(3)(ii); Lin, 588 F.3d at 989 (BIA’s
determination that petitioner did not establish material changed country conditions
was not “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”).
To the extent Jimenez-Morataya contends he established eligibility for relief,
we do not reach this contention in light of our disposition.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-70664 2

-- 2 of 2 --