Background
TingTing Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of her motion to reopen. The motion sought to reopen proceedings to reassess her asylum claim based on changed country conditions or to apply for adjustment of status. The motion was her second such motion and was filed well beyond the standard ninety-day deadline.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the BIA’s denial for abuse of discretion, reversing only if the decision was arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law. The court found the motion untimely and a second motion, and the BIA did not abuse its discretion in declining to excuse these restrictions. The court held that Zhang failed to demonstrate that prior counsel’s ineffectiveness prevented her from timely filing the current motion, as the motion did not seek to restore her right to petition for review of the prior decision. Additionally, the court found no abuse of discretion in concluding that changed country conditions did not exempt her from the time and number restrictions given the longstanding persecution in China. The court further held it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision to decline sua sponte reopening or the underlying asylum denial, as Zhang never timely petitioned for review of the 2016 decision.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces strict adherence to the ninety-day filing deadline and single-motion rule for reopening removal proceedings, limiting equitable tolling arguments where the petitioner does not show a direct causal link between counsel’s error and the failure to file the current motion.