Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an Indonesian citizen, the petitioner, seeking review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) decision denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. The jurisdiction for review is grounded in 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and the court applies an abuse of discretion standard. The petitioner's motion was filed nearly six years after the final decision, contrary to the timeliness requirement under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). He failed to demonstrate any significant changes in circumstances in Indonesia that could potentially impact his claim, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii). His due process claims were also unsubstantiated, lacking evidence of procedural errors, consistent with the precedent established in Lata v. INS. Moreover, his request to reopen based on evolved legal interpretations concerning Christian Indonesians was rejected, aligning with earlier determinations. The petition for review was ultimately denied, and the court's disposition is not designated for publication or precedent, in accordance with 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Changed Circumstances Exceptionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Johanes failed to show significant changes in circumstances in Indonesia to warrant reopening under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).
Reasoning: Furthermore, Johanes failed to demonstrate any significant changes in circumstances in Indonesia that would materially affect his claim, as stipulated in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).
Due Process in Immigration Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found no due process violation as Johanes did not demonstrate any procedural errors in his case.
Reasoning: The decision also addresses Johanes's due process claims, indicating that he did not prove any errors that would substantiate a violation, following the precedent set in Lata v. INS.
Reopening Based on Changes in Legal Interpretationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Johanes's argument for reopening based on changes in legal interpretations for Christian Indonesians was dismissed by the court.
Reasoning: Lastly, the court dismissed Johanes's argument for reopening based on changes in legal interpretations regarding Christian Indonesians, referencing a prior ruling.
Standard of Review for BIA Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reviewed the BIA's denial of Johanes's motion to reopen for abuse of discretion.
Reasoning: The jurisdiction is established under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, with a standard of review for abuse of discretion concerning the BIA’s denial of such motions.
Timeliness of Motion to Reopensubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Johanes's motion to reopen was deemed untimely as it was filed nearly six years after the BIA's final decision.
Reasoning: The petition is denied as the BIA did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Johanes's untimely motion, which was submitted nearly six years after the BIA's final decision, in violation of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2).