GHAHREMANI NEJAD v. WHITAKER (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Ali Ghahremani-Nejad, a native and citizen of Iran, 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 denial of a motion to reopen and we review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Ghahremani-Nejad’s motion to reopen as untimely where he filed it more than seven years after the BIA’s final decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and where Ghahremani-Nejad failed to demonstrate changed country conditions in Iran to qualify for an exception to the time limitation for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 987-90 (9th Cir. 2010) (evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening).

In denying Ghahremani-Nejad’s motion to reopen as untimely, the BIA failed to address his request for sua sponte relief. Thus, we remand for the BIA to consider Ghahremani-Nejad’s request in the first instance. See Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he BIA [is] not free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner.”).

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED.