Roberto Cardenas Caballero v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERTO CARDENAS CABALLERO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
Nos. 11-73353
12-73597
Agency No. A074-800-218
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Roberto Cardenas Caballero, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders denying his second
(petition No. 11-73353) and third (petition No. 12-73597) motions to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
MAY 20 2014
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 --

abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder,
597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petitions for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Cardenas Caballero’s second
and third motions to reopen as untimely and number-barred because the motions
were filed more than 13 and 14 years, respectively, after the final administrative
decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Cardenas Caballero failed to establish
changed country conditions to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and
number limitations for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii);
Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987 (new evidence “must be ‘qualitatively different’ from
the evidence presented at the previous hearing”).
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73353/12-73597

-- 2 of 2 --