18-1189 Diallo v. Barr BIA A095 837 900 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 7th day of July, two thousand twenty. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JON O. NEWMAN, 8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 9 GERARD E. LYNCH, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 ABDOULAYE DIALLO, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 18-1189 17 NAC 18 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Abdoulaye Diallo, pro se, 24 Brooklyn, NY. 25 26 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney 27 General; Anthony C. Payne, 28 Assistant Director; Colette J. 29 Winston, Trial Attorney, Office of 30 Immigration Litigation, United 31 States Department of Justice, 32 Washington, DC. 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 4 is DENIED. 5 Petitioner Abdoulaye Diallo, a native and citizen of 6 Guinea, seeks review of an April 6, 2018, decision of the BIA 7 denying his motion to reopen. In re Abdoulaye Diallo, No. 8 A095 837 900 (B.I.A. April 6, 2018). We assume the parties’ 9 familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history. 10 We review a denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of 11 discretion. See Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 168– 12 69 (2d Cir. 2008). When the agency considers relevant 13 evidence of country conditions in evaluating a motion to 14 reopen, we review its factual findings under the substantial 15 evidence standard. Id. at 169. 16 An alien seeking to reopen may file one motion to reopen 17 no later than 90 days after the final administrative decision. 18 See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(A), (C)(i). However, the time 19 limitation does not apply if the motion is filed in order to 20 apply for asylum “based on changed country conditions arising 21 in the country of nationality or the country to which removal 2 1 has been ordered, if such evidence is material and was not 2 available and would not have been discovered or presented at 3 the previous hearing.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii); see 4 also 8 C.F.R. § ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals