Tan Giok Tjan 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
TAN GIOK TJAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-70058
Agency No. A095-634-706
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 11, 2013**
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Tan Giok Tjan, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of discretion the
FILED
FEB 15 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-70058 2
BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th
Cir. 2002). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Tjan’s motion to reopen that
he filed based on Tampubolon v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2010), where
Tjan did not present any evidence of individualized risk of persecution. See Halim
v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 979 (9th Cir. 2009); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (providing
that a motion to reopen “shall state the new facts that will be proven at a hearing to
be held if the motion is granted and shall be supported by affidavits or other
evidentiary material”). We reject Tjan’s arguments regarding the agency’s prior
analysis of his disfavored group claims in light of our decision in Tjan v. Holder,
No. 07-73532, 2010 WL 675191 (9th Cir. Feb. 23, 2010). Accordingly, we deny
the petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --