NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 15 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DALI EDUVIGES PEREZ PEREZ, No. 20-71815 Petitioner, Agency No. A206-915-519 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 8, 2021** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges. Dali Eduviges Perez Perez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. * 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). Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Perez Perez’s motion to reopen as untimely, where it was filed over two years after the order of removal became final, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and she has not established changed country conditions in Guatemala to qualify for the regulatory exception to the filing deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir. 2008) (requiring movant to produce material evidence with motion to reopen that conditions in country of nationality had changed); see also Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987-90 (evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening). Perez Perez’s contention that the BIA’s denial of her motion violated her right to due process fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim). The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 20-71815 20-71815 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Dali Perez Perez v. Merrick Garland 15 November 2021 Agency Unpublished 9a4acbdd34ea5da1ecef9bf547b0851d2d7eea79
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals