No. 23-1712

HARTONO DJOKRO; WILLIAM SIMAJAYA DJOKRO,

Petitioners,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent.

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

Before

Kayatta, Lynch, and Montecalvo, Circuit Judges.

William A. Hahn, with whom Hahn & Matkov was on brief, for petitioners. Tim Ramnitz¸ with whom Carmel A. Morgan, Senior Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Julia J. Tyler, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation were on brief, for respondent.

May 17, 2024 LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Hartono Djokro and his son William Djokro petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"), issued in August 2023, denying their second untimely motion to reopen, filed on July 26, 2021.

The immigration judge's initial denial of relief from removal was upheld by the BIA in March 2012. The BIA denied the petitioners' first motion to reopen on February 26, 2013.

We deny this petition seeking review of the BIA's second denial of reopening because the BIA reasonably concluded that petitioners had failed to satisfy the requirements for an exception to late filing contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii) and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii). See Molina v. Barr, 952 F.3d 25, 31 (1st Cir. 2020).

I.

Lead petitioner Hartono Djokro and his son, petitioner William Simajaya Djokro, are citizens of Indonesia who entered the United States as nonimmigrant visitors on, respectively, February 3, 2006, and January 23, 2007, and overstayed their visas.

In December 2007, Hartono Djokro filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), including his son as a derivative applicant. Djokro identified himself and his son as Chinese Indonesian and Catholic.

- 2 - On March 28, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") served petitioners with notices to appear, charging them with removability pursuant to section 237(a)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA"), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B), for having remained in the United States longer than they had been authorized. Petitioners were ordered to appear before an immigration judge on July 3, 2008. William Djokro applied separately for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the U.N. Convention Against Torture ("CAT") in April 2009.

On November 16, 2009, an immigration judge ("IJ") denied petitioners' applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the CAT, after a hearing on October 19, 2009. The IJ found that petitioners were ineligible for relief on several grounds: 1) lead petitioner Hartono Djokro's application for asylum was time-barred; 2) both petitioners had failed to "establish[] that they ha[d] been persecuted in the past," as "the harm" they alleged had been "inflicted upon [them]" was not "severe enough to constitute persecution"; 3) they had failed to "establish a pattern or practice of persecution against either Chinese or Christians" in Indonesia; and 4) they had failed to establish that the Indonesian government had "participate[d]" in "incidents of violence" against Christians or Chinese people or was "unwilling to provide protection." As such, the IJ found that petitioners

- 3 - were not eligible for asylum or withholding of remova