Herman Surjadi 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
HERMAN SURJADI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-75119
Agency No. A075-659-899
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 23, 2010**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Herman Surjadi, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
SEP 07 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-75119 2
abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we
deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Surjadi’s motion to reopen
as untimely where it was filed over five years after the BIA’s final order, see 8
C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Surjadi failed to establish changed circumstances in
Indonesia to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation, see 8
C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir.
2008) (evidence must demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief in order to
reopen proceedings based on changed country conditions).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --