Viktor Nikolayevich Ostapenko v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VIKTOR NIKOLAYEVICH
OSTAPENKO,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-71883
Agency No. A071-320-466
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N. R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Viktor Nikolayevich Ostapenko, a native and citizen of Moldova, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
third 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,
* 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
OCT 2 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-71883
Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition
for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Ostapenko’s third motion to
reopen as untimely where it was filed more than two years after the BIA’s final
order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and where Ostapenko failed to establish prima
facie eligibility for the relief he sought, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi,
538 F.3d at 996 (the BIA may deny a motion to reopen for failure to establish
prima facie eligibility for the relief sought).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --