JUN LI V. LORETTA E. LYNCH, No. 12-73113 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED OCT 26 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 12-73113 JUN FU LI, Agency No. A079-543-613 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 22, 2015** San Francisco, California Before: PAEZ, MURGUIA, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Jun Fu Li petitions for review from an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We deny the petition in part and dismiss it in part. 1. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Li’s concededly * 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). untimely motion to reopen. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i). The BIA properly determined that Li’s failure to file a new asylum application was fatal to his motion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (“A motion to reopen proceedings for the purpose of submitting an application for relief must be accompanied by the appropriate application for relief and all supporting documentation.”); see also Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008) (affirming BIA’s denial of motion to reopen because petitioner failed to present evidence of an approved visa as required to establish “prima facie eligibility for the relief sought”). 2. We lack jurisdiction to consider Li’s challenge to the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua sponte authority to reopen removal proceedings. Sharma v. Holder, 633 F.3d 865, 874 (9th Cir. 2011). PETITION DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART. 2

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.