SUKHWINDER SINGH, AKA Sukhwinder Multani v. JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SUKHWINDER SINGH, AKA Sukhwinder
Multani,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73414
Agency No. A088-517-600
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Sukhwinder 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 review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
reopen, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-73414
petition for review.
We do not consider Singh’s challenges to the adverse credibility
determination which the agency made in Singh’s underlying proceedings, and
which this court previously reviewed in Singh v. Holder, No. 10-72011, 570 Fed.
Appx. 644, 2014 WL 1492729 (9th Cir. 2014).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen
where he filed it more than three years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to establish changed country conditions in India to
qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing a motion to reopen,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97
(9th Cir. 2008) (underlying adverse credibility determination rendered evidence of
changed circumstances immaterial).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --