Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
RRAFMAN KOCI, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM*
Rrafman Koci, a native and citizen of Albania, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals's (BIA) denial of his third motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Koci's third motion to reopen. Ordinarily, “a party may file only one motion to reopen deportation or exclusion proceedings ․ and that motion must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered ․” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). A statutory exception is available, however, if the petitioner presents evidence that is “material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the previous hearing.” Id. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).
Koci's third motion to reopen is both untimely and successive. Moreover, Koci has failed to demonstrate a material change of conditions in Albania that would entitle him to the statutory exception. The publication of our 2008 memorandum disposition on the Internet is not material to Koci's application for relief because Koci has not demonstrated that the publication increased his risk of harm in Albania. Nor are the news articles attached to Koci's motion material. Although they demonstrate that tensions between democrats and socialists continue, they do not establish a material change in Albania. Even more importantly, however, Koci has not presented evidence that negates the Immigration Judge's initial adverse credibility finding, which we affirmed in a prior appeal. Koci v. Mukasey, 270 F. App'x 644 (9th Cir. 2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 12-70998
Decided: December 14, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)