RINAWATI, AKA Rinawati Fnu; TJAHAJA PRATOMO BONG v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RINAWATI, AKA Rinawati Fnu;
TJAHAJA PRATOMO BONG,
Petitioners,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72510
Agency Nos. A099-739-945
A099-739-946
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.
Rinawati and Tjahaja Pratomo Bong, natives and citizens of Indonesia,
petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying
their motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have jurisdiction under
FILED
NOV 24 2015
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 --

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion
to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the
petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen because it was untimely and petitioners did not establish materially changed
circumstances in Indonesia as to overcome the time limitation for a motion to
reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987-90
(evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening). We reject
petitioners’ contention that the BIA ignored evidence. See id. at 986 (the court
“defer[s] to the BIA’s exercise of discretion unless it acted arbitrarily, irrationally,
or contrary to law”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72510 2

-- 2 of 2 --