*1 Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Prabhijit Singh Bhullar, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder , *2 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Bhullar’s motion to reopen where he filed it more than 90 days after the BIA’s final administrative decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and where he failed to establish materially changed circumstances in India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitations for motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3); Najmabadi , 597 F.3d at 991-92 (BIA did not abuse its discretion where petitioner failed to introduce material evidence).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED .

2 12-72084

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).