Ruigang Liu 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RUIGANG LIU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71888
Agency No. A088-286-070
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 6, 2012**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Ruigang Liu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s
decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
FILED
MAR 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71888 2
denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law. Sembiring v.
Gonzales, 499 F.3d 981, 985 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion or commit legal error in denying
Liu’s motion to reopen on the ground that his mistake concerning his hearing date
did not constitute exceptional circumstances beyond his control that would excuse
his failure to appear. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1); Valencia-Fragoso v. INS, 321
F.3d 1204, 1205-06 (9th Cir. 2003) (per curiam) (finding no exceptional
circumstances where petitioner misunderstood the time of her hearing).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --