Labinot Kurtaj v. Jefferson Sessions, III, 687 F. App'x 403

Petitioner Labinot Kurtaj seeks review of the BIA’s denial of his second motion to reopen removal proceedings as untimely.
Kurtaj’s asylum claim rests on threats he received for being a witness to a murder; he previously tried to link those threats to a political opinion.
At the original merits hearing (2007), the immigration judge found Kurtaj’s attempt to ascribe a political motive not credible.
Kurtaj argued his new evidence showed changed country conditions in Kosovo material to his asylum claim and unavailable at the 2007 hearing.
The BIA denied reopening under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) as untimely, concluding the claimed country-condition changes were immaterial given the lack of a political basis for the threats.
The Fifth Circuit reviews denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion and reviews factual findings for substantial evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the time/numerical limits for motions to reopen are excused by material changed country conditions	Kurtaj: new evidence shows changed Kosovo conditions material to his asylum claim and unavailable earlier, so the motion is timely under the changed-circumstances exception	BIA: even with new evidence, country-condition changes are immaterial because Kurtaj’s feared harm was not shown to be linked to political opinion; new evidence does not establish a material change	Court: Denied — substantial evidence supports BIA that evidence was immaterial and did not show a material change, so motion properly denied as untimely

Panjwani v. Gonzales, 401 F.3d 626 (5th Cir. 2005) (standard of review for motions to reopen and discussion of timeliness limits)
Zhenghao Liu v. Holder, [citation="457 F. App'x 446"] (5th Cir. 2012) (BIA compares evidence submitted with motion to conditions at prior merits hearing to assess material change)