Kulwant Singh Bains 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KULWANT SINGH BAINS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71591
Agency No. A072-116-005
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Kulwant Singh Bains, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen his deportation proceedings
conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing
FILED
AUG 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-71591 2
for abuse of discretion, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010),
we deny the petition for review.
The IJ did not abuse her discretion in denying Bains’ motion to reopen
because the record shows that he was personally served with a hearing notice
ordering him to appear on March 26, 1997, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252b(a)(2),(c)(1)
(repealed 1996), and because he failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in
India, see Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The critical
question is . . . whether circumstances have changed sufficiently that a petitioner
who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has a well-founded
fear of future persecution.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --