Kwet Liong v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KWET LIONG,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70912
Agency No. A088-291-902
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Kwet Liong, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion, Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and
* 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
MAR 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-70912
we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Liong’s untimely motion to
reopen where Liong failed to establish prima facie eligibility for asylum,
withholding of removal, or relief under the Convention Against Torture to qualify
for an exception to the time limitation for motions to reopen. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 986 (the BIA can deny a
motion to reopen for failure to establish a prima facie case for the relief sought);
Tampubolon v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1056, 1062 (9th Cir. 2010) (petitioner’s
membership in the disfavored group of Christian Indonesians was not sufficient by
itself to meet the burden of proof and some evidence of individualized risk was
necessary for the petitioner to succeed) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --