Eugenia Paris, a.k.a. Jenny Paris v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EUGENIA PARIS, a.k.a. Jenny Paris,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70685
Agency No. A026-823-395
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 24, 2013**
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Eugenia Paris, a native and citizen of Romania, 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
FILED
SEP 26 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-70685 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d
672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Paris’s third motion to
reopen as untimely and number-barred because the successive motion was filed
more than four years after the BIA’s final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. §
1003.2(c)(2), and Paris failed to establish the due diligence required for equitable
tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 678-80 (equitable tolling is
available to a petitioner who establishes that she suffered from deception, fraud or
error, and exercised due diligence in discovering such circumstances).
In light of our disposition, we need not reach Paris’s remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --