Armen Danielyan 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ARMEN DANIELYAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71648
Agency No. A075-686-772
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Armen Danielyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, 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 14 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71648 2
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Singh v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d
1090, 1095 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Danielyan’s motion to
reopen as untimely. Danielyan filed the motion over three years after the BIA’s
March 28, 2006, order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and he did not
demonstrate that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling of
the filing deadline, see Singh, 491 F.3d at 1095-96.
In light of this determination, we do not reach Danielyan’s remaining
contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --