Shu Xiong Dong v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHU XIONG DONG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71669
Agency No. A095-448-360
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Shu Xiong Dong, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his second motion to
reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review for an abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen.
FILED
DEC 9 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for
review.
For a second time, Dong argues the BIA should have reopened his case
based on changes in China’s country conditions with respect to Falun Gong
practitioners and based on the birth of his second child in the United States. The
BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Dong’s motion to reopen as time-
barred and number-barred, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), where Dong failed to
demonstrate he qualified for an exception to the limitations on motions to reopen,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 986 (we “defer to the BIA’s
exercise of discretion unless it acted arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law”)
(citation omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-71669 2

-- 2 of 2 --