Le Wang v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LE WANG,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-71976
Agency No. A097-873-011
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 11, 2019**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Le Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal
proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597
* 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 14 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-71976
F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Wang’s second motion to
reopen as untimely and numerically barred where he filed it nine years after the
BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and where he failed to demonstrate
materially changed country conditions in China to qualify for an exception to the
time and numerical limitations for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 990-91 (evidence must be “qualitatively
different” to warrant reopening). We reject Wang’s contention that the BIA did
not properly evaluate all of his evidence.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to reopen proceedings
sua sponte. See Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016) (“[T]his court
has jurisdiction to review Board decisions denying sua sponte reopening for the
limited purpose of reviewing the reasoning behind the decisions for legal or
constitutional error.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --