Sohan Singh v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SOHAN SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-71119
Agency No. A077-844-545
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.
Sohan Singh, a native and citizen of India, seeks 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 abuse of discretion the BIA’s
denial of a motion to reopen, we review for substantial evidence the BIA’s factual
*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
JUN 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-71119
findings, and we review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400
F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We grant the petition for review and remand.
The BIA abused its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as
untimely, where he provided sufficient evidence of changed circumstances in
India, see Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945-48 (9th Cir. 2004), and where the
BIA failed to provide a reasoned explanation as to why Singh did not establish a
prima facie case for relief, see Franco-Rosendo v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 965, 966
(9th Cir. 2006). Thus, we grant the petition for review and remand for further
proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12,
16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --