Da Juan Wang 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DA JUAN WANG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70052
Agency No. A075-765-438
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.
Da Juan Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
MAR 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-70052 2
an abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. See Toufighi v.
Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Wang’s motion to reopen as
untimely, where she filed the motion more than six years after the BIA’s final
order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Wang failed to demonstrate that there has
been a material change in circumstances in China with respect to the government’s
mistreatment of political dissidents, see Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 991
(9th Cir. 2010); He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir. 2007) (a change in
personal circumstances does not establish changed country conditions).
Wang’s request for oral argument is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --