Background
Gurjeet Singh, his wife, and their daughter, natives and citizens of India, petitioned for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying their motion to reopen immigration proceedings as untimely. The petitioners filed their motion outside the standard ninety-day deadline, arguing it was based on changed country conditions. The Board denied the motion, finding that documentary evidence was insufficient and that threats against the family were personal circumstances rather than changes in country conditions.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the Board’s denial for an abuse of discretion. While the court agreed with the Board that the documentary evidence was largely inadmissible due to timing and lack of dates, it found error in the Board’s legal characterization of the threats. The court held that threats against the petitioners’ family in India in 2025, which were outside their control, constituted a change in country conditions rather than a change in personal circumstances. The court cited precedent establishing that such threats in the country of removal are changed country conditions.
What it means going forward
The decision requires the Board of Immigration Appeals to reconsider the petitioners’ motion to reopen, specifically evaluating the materiality of the 2025 attacks on their family as a change in country conditions.