Majar 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MAJAR SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74820
Agency No. A077-839-343
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Majar Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his third motion to reopen. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of discretion,
Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition
FILED
JAN 24 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74820 2
for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s third motion to
reopen because it considered the evidence submitted and acted within its broad
discretion in determining Singh did not demonstrate prima facie eligibility for the
relief sought. See INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 104-05 (1988) (the BIA may deny a
motion to reopen for failure to establish a prima facie case for the underlying relief
sought).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --