Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630702
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Singh v. Gonzales
No. 8630702 · Decided April 27, 2007
No. 8630702·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 27, 2007
Citation
No. 8630702
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Kuldip Singh, Ranjit Kaur, and their three children, natives and citizens of India, seek review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review. The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely the petitioners’ motion to reopen because it was filed more than 18 months after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of final administrative removal order), and the petitioners failed to present new and material evidence of changed conditions in India, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii) (no time limit on motion to reopen to apply for asylum based on changed country conditions). We do not consider Singh’s contentions regarding the agency’s order denying asylum, which we upheld in Singh v. Gonzales, 134 Fed.Appx. 208 (9th Cir.2005). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Kuldip Singh, Ranjit Kaur, and their three children, natives and citizens of India, seek review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Kuldip Singh, Ranjit Kaur, and their three children, natives and citizens of India, seek review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
02INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.
03The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely the petitioners’ motion to reopen because it was filed more than 18 months after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 U.S.C.
04§ 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of final administrative removal order), and the petitioners failed to present new and material evidence of changed conditions in India, see 8 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Kuldip Singh, Ranjit Kaur, and their three children, natives and citizens of India, seek review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Singh v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 27, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630702 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.