Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8699169
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Valencia v. Sessions
No. 8699169 · Decided March 16, 2017
No. 8699169·Ninth Circuit · 2017·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
March 16, 2017
Citation
No. 8699169
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Oscar Roberto Valencia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, 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.G, § 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), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Valencia’s second motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred where he filed it over three years after the final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2), and where he failed to establish materially changed country conditions in El Salvador to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and number limitations, 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). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Oscar Roberto Valencia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Oscar Roberto Valencia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
02We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, Najmabadi v.
03The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Valencia’s second motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred where he filed it over three years after the final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R.
04§ 1003.2 (c)(2), and where he failed to establish materially changed country conditions in El Salvador to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time and number limitations, see 8 C.F.R.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Oscar Roberto Valencia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Valencia v. Sessions in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 16, 2017.
Use the citation No. 8699169 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.