George Johan Londah-Evert; Joy Jerry Londah v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GEORGE JOHAN LONDAH-EVERT;
JOY JERRY LONDAH,
Petitioners,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-71249
Agency Nos. A074-417-877
A095-635-767
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
George Johan Londah-Evert and Joy Jerry Londah, natives and citizens of
Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUL 5 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-71249
discretion, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny
the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen as untimely, where the motion was filed more than twenty-one months after
the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to
demonstrate changed circumstances in Indonesia to qualify for an exception to the
time limitation for a motion to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii), Najmabadi,
597 F.3d at 991-92 (BIA did not abuse its discretion where petitioner failed to
produce material evidence). We reject petitioners’ argument that the BIA erred in
its analysis.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --