Huiayu Chen v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 543 F. App'x 695 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           OCT 23 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    HUIAYU CHEN,                                     No. 12-72772
    Petitioner,                       Agency No. A077-222-959
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted October 15, 2013**
    Before:        FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    Huiayu Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
    of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal
    proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    .
    We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. He v.
    *
    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).
    Gonzales, 
    501 F.3d 1128
    , 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny the petition for
    review.
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Chen’s motion to reopen on
    the grounds that it was number barred, see 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2
    (c)(2) (generally, “a
    party may file only one motion to reopen removal proceedings”), and that she had
    failed to demonstrate a material change in circumstances in China to qualify for the
    regulatory exception to the numerical bar, see He, 
    501 F.3d at 1132
     (a change in
    personal circumstances does not establish changed country conditions).
    Finally, because our determination regarding the number bar is dispositive,
    we decline to consider Chen’s allegation of lack of notice. See Mendez-Alcaraz v.
    Gonzales, 
    464 F.3d 842
    , 844 (9th Cir. 2006) (declining to reach nondispositive
    challenges to a BIA order).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                    12-72772
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-72772

Citation Numbers: 543 F. App'x 695

Judges: Bybee, Fisher, Gould

Filed Date: 10/23/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024