NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 20-2318 ______________ WAQAR ALI BANGASH, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (A079-734-990) Immigration Judge: Rosalind Malloy ______________ Submitted under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) May 28, 2021 ______________ Before: GREENAWAY, JR., SHWARTZ, Circuit Judges, and ROBRENO, District Judge. * (Filed: June 17, 2021) ______________ OPINION ** ______________ * The Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. ** This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. ROBRENO, District Judge. Petitioner Waqar Bangash (“Bangash”) seeks review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Bangash sought to reopen his application for withholding of removal, asylum, and relief under the Convention Against Torture based on changed country circumstances. He alleges that conditions for Pashtun Shia Muslims in Pakistan have changed significantly for the worse since his immigration hearing in 2004 before an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) and he has a well-founded fear of future persecution based on being a Pashtun Shia Muslim. The BIA denied his petition after finding insufficient evidence of changed country conditions affecting this particular group. Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s decision, and it thus did not abuse its discretion, we will deny the petition for review. I. Background Bangash is a citizen of Pakistan who entered the United States on August 16, 1998 under a student visa. Bangash overstayed his visa, and, on March 22, 2003, an immigration court charged him as removable. Bangash conceded that he was removable but requested a continuance pending the resolution of a labor certification application filed in April 2001. On December 21, 2004, and after granting three prior continuances, the IJ denied Bangash’s request for a further continuance related to his pending labor certification and granted Bangash’s request for voluntary departure. Bangash appealed, arguing that the IJ should have continued the proceedings again due to the pending labor certification. On September 23, 2005, the BIA 2 dismissed Bangash’s appeal, concluding that the IJ did not abuse her discretion in denying the requested continuance. On October 26, 2005, Bangash filed a motion to reopen and reconsider on the basis that the labor certification was still pending. In a December 1, 2005 order, the BIA denied the motion to reconsider, concluding that Bangash had not identified any reversible error; and denied the motion to reopen, concluding that it was not accompanied by new evidence. Bangash filed a petition for review with this Court, which was denied on February 27, 2007. Bangash v. Att’y Gen., 226 F. App’x 124 (3d Cir. 2007). On February 15, 2008, Bangash filed another motion to reopen arguing that country conditions in Pakistan had worsened for Pashtun Shia Muslims. The BIA denied the motion on April 2, 2008. The BIA concluded …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals