FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8696212
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Singh v. Lynch

No. 8696212 · Decided March 2, 2016
No. 8696212 · Ninth Circuit · 2016 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
March 2, 2016
Citation
No. 8696212
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** . Sukhdev Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir.2010). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen because it was filed more than four years after his order of removal became final, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and Singh failed to present material evidence of changed circumstances in India to qualify for a regulatory exception to the time limitation for filing a motion to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(3)(ii); Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987-90 (evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir.2008) (evidence was immaterial in light of prior adverse credibility determination). We reject both Singh’s contention that the BIA failed to address the supplemental evidence he filed in support of his motion, see Lin v. Holder, 588 F.3d 981, 987 (9th Cir.2009), and his contention that the BIA erred in its assessment of his wife’s affidavits. Finally, the record does not support Singh’s contention that the BIA did not address his CAT claim in denying his motion to reopen. 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
Sukhdev Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
Sukhdev Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Singh v. Lynch in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 2, 2016.
Use the citation No. 8696212 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →