Svitlana Bila 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).
KY/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SVITLANA BILA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73770
Agency No. A097-348-340
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Svitlana Bila, a native and citizen of Ukraine, 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
FEB 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

KY/Research 07-73770 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d
889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Bila’s motion to reopen as
untimely because it was filed almost nine months after the final order of
deportation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1) (motion to reopen must be filed within
ninety days of final order of deportation), and Bila failed to establish that any of
the regulatory exceptions apply, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --