JASBIR UPPAL V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-71494 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED SEP 18 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JASBIR SINGH UPPAL; et al., Petitioners, No. 10-71494 Agency Nos. v. A077-843-988 A077-843-989 A077-843-990 ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM * Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 10, 2012 ** Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Jasbir Singh Uppal and his family, natives and citizens of India, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of * 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). discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners motion to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed almost five years after the BIA s final administrative order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996 (requiring movant to produce material evidence with motion to reopen that conditions in country of nationality had changed). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 10-71494

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.