Anjelia v. Gonzales
Anjelia v. Gonzales
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Anjelia Sarian Anjelia, a native of Bulgaria and citizen of Armenia, and her husband, Grigor Babayan, a native of Iran and citizen of Armenia, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order denying Sarian’s motion to reopen to apply for adjustment of status and a BIA order denying Babayan’s motions to reopen to apply for adjustment of status and to reapply for asylum based on changed circumstances. We dismiss in part, deny in part and grant in part the petitions for review and remand for further proceedings.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153,1159 (9th Cir. 2002).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Babayan’s motion to reopen to reapply for asylum based on changed circumstances affecting Jehovah’s Witnesses in Armenia because Babayan faded to demonstrate that the agency’s prior adverse credibility determination was in error. See Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 785 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that a motion to reopen must establish a prima facie case demonstrating “a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied”).
Petitioners’ remaining contentions are without merit.
No. 05-72911: PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED.
No. 05-73276: PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.