FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 08 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MANJIT KAUR JOSHAN; GURMIT No. 08-73109
SINGH JOSHAN, a.k.a. Karmit Singh
Joshan, Agency Nos. A072-176-805
A072-010-100
Petitioners,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Manjit Kaur Joshan and Gurmit Singh Joshan, natives and citizens of India,
petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying
their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen,
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen on the ground that they did not establish that their former counsel failed to
present arguments that may have affected the outcome of their case. See id. at 899-
900 (petitioner must show prejudice to prevail on an ineffective assistance claim).
Contrary to petitioners’ contention, a presumption of prejudice does not apply. Cf.
Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1182, 1189 (9th Cir. 2004) (applying presumption of
prejudice where counsel failed to file any brief on appeal).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-73109