Dilbag Singh, a.k.a. Dilbagh Singh 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DILBAG SINGH, a.k.a. Dilbagh Singh,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72427
Agency No. A072-136-814
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Dilbag Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of
FILED
OCT 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72427 2
a motion to reopen, Singh v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir. 2007), and
we deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Singh’s motion
to reopen because the motion was filed almost 10 years after the BIA’s final
removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh did not show that he acted
with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Singh, 491 F.3d at 1096-
97.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --