
    Sanjiv KUMAR, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-70612.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 5, 2007.
    
    Filed June 7, 2007.
    Teresa Salazar, Law Offices of Martin Resendez Guajardo a Professional Corporation, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Mark L. Gross, Esq., Christopher C. Wang, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division/Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    
      Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Sanjiv Kumar, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen to reapply for asylum based upon changed country conditions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.

The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Kumar’s motion to reopen because it was filed nearly one year after the BIA’s final removal order, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90 days of final administrative removal order), and Kumar failed to present new and material evidence of changed conditions in India, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (no time limit on motion to reopen to apply for asylum based on changed country conditions).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cír. R. 36-3.
     