Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8508620
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Hongxiang Lin v. Holder
No. 8508620 · Decided September 30, 2010
No. 8508620·Ninth Circuit · 2010·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
September 30, 2010
Citation
No. 8508620
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Hongxiang Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion, He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lin’s motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed more than a year after the BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and he failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in China to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); see also He, 501 F.3d at 1132 (the birth of children outside the country of origin is a change in personal circumstances that is not sufficient to establish changed circumstances). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Hongxiang Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Hongxiang Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen.
02The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lin’s motion to reopen as untimely where the motion was filed more than a year after the BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R.
03§ 1003.2 (c)(2), and he failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in China to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation, see 8 C.F.R.
04§ 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); see also He, 501 F.3d at 1132 (the birth of children outside the country of origin is a change in personal circumstances that is not sufficient to establish changed circumstances).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Hongxiang Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Hongxiang Lin v. Holder in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on September 30, 2010.
Use the citation No. 8508620 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.