9th Cir.

JUAN CHILEL-CHILEL v. PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General

April 9, 2026 ·21-70220 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review regarding a motion to reopen removal proceedings, affirming the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate materially changed country conditions in Guatemala sufficient to overcome the statutory filing deadline.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 2:21

Juan Chilel-Chilel, a petitioner in removal proceedings, filed a motion to reopen his case after the 90-day statutory deadline had passed. He argued that country conditions in Guatemala had changed materially, warranting an exception to the deadline under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii). The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied the motion, ruling it was untimely and that the petitioner failed to show the necessary changes in country conditions. The BIA also declined to exercise its authority to reopen the proceedings sua sponte. Chilel-Chilel appealed to the Ninth Circuit, challenging the BIA's decision.

The Ninth Circuit reviewed the BIA's denial for abuse of discretion. The court noted that while it has jurisdiction to review the denial of a statutorily authorized motion to reopen, the petitioner must demonstrate materially changed country conditions to justify an exception to the 90-day filing deadline. The petitioner submitted reports from 2016 and 2020 as evidence. However, the court agreed with the BIA that these reports did not provide evidence of materially different conditions from those existing at the time of the petitioner's removal hearing. Citing Agonafer v. Sessions, the court explained that evidence simply recounting previous conditions is insufficient to show a change. Additionally, the court addressed the petitioner's claim that the BIA's refusal to reopen sua sponte violated his due process rights. The court held that it only reviews such decisions for legal or constitutional error and found no such error, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate a truly exceptional situation or a violation of due process rights.

The petition is denied, meaning the BIA's original decision to deny the motion to reopen stands. The administrative stay of removal is lifted, allowing removal proceedings to proceed. The decision reinforces the strict application of the 90-day filing deadline for motions to reopen and the high bar for proving changed country conditions that differ from those already presented.

Play