Thomas Tedros Amanuel, a.k.a. Thomas T. Amanuel, a.k.a. Thomas Amanuel Tedros,… v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
THOMAS TEDROS AMANUEL, a.k.a.
Thomas T. Amanuel, a.k.a. Thomas
Amanuel Tedros, a.k.a. Thomas Johnny
Tedros,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-73486
Agency No. A025-303-038
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Thomas Tedros Amanuel, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, 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
* 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
AUG 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-73486
review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v.
Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Amanuel’s second untimely
motion to reopen where Amanuel failed to present evidence of materially changed
country conditions in Eritrea to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and
number limitations for filing a motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)-(3);
Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987 (in order for evidence to be material, it must be
qualitatively different from the evidence presented at the previous hearing).
Because this determination is dispositive of Amanuel’s motion to reopen, we do
not reach his contention that the BIA applied the wrong legal standard when
analyzing whether Amanuel established prima facie eligibility for relief.
Finally, we reject as unsupported by the record Amanuel’s contention that
the BIA failed to consider his claim that he would be persecuted or tortured on
account of his religion.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --