07-5467-ag Li v. Holder BIA A078 840 467

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan 3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of 4 New York, on the 27th day of October, two thousand ten.

6 PRESENT: 7 DENNIS JACOBS, 8 Chief Judge, 9 JON O. NEWMAN, 10 PIERRE N. LEVAL, 11 Circuit Judges.

12 _________________________________________ 14 MEI FENG LI, 15 Petitioner, 17 v. 07-5467-ag 18 NAC 19 ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., UNITED STATES 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL,* 21 Respondent.

22 _________________________________________

* Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., is automatically substituted for former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey as respondent in this case.

08232010-26 FOR PETITIONER: Jeffrey E. Baron, Baron, Mundie & 2 Shelkin, P.C., New York, New York.

4 FOR RESPONDENT: Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant 5 Attorney General; Mary Jane Candaux, 6 Assistant Director; Briena L.

7 Strippoli, Trial Attorney, Office of 8 Immigration Litigation, United 9 States Department of Justice, 10 Washington, D.C. 12 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, that the petition for review is DENIED.

16 Mei Feng Li, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of a November 8, 2007, BIA order denying her motion to reopen. In re Mei Feng Li, No. A078 840 467 (B.I.A. Nov.

19 8, 2007). Li’s motion to reopen was based on her claim that she fears persecution on account of the birth of her U.S. citizen children in violation of China’s family planning policy. For largely the same reasons this Court set forth in Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 169 (2d Cir. 2008), we find no error in the BIA’s decision denying her motion to reopen. See id. at 168-72. Moreover, the BIA reasonably declined to address some of Li’s evidence because she failed to establish that it was unavailable at the time of her merits hearing. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1); see also INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 104-05 (1988).

08232010-26 2 1 For the foregoing reasons, this petition for review is DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule 34.1(b).

9 FOR THE COURT: 10 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

08232010-26 3