FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN ROBLES CISNEROS; SONIA No. 07-72594
RUTH ZAMORA DE LA O,
Agency Nos. A075-744-014
Petitioners, A075-744-013
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Juan Robles Cisneros and Sonia Ruth Zamora De La O, natives and citizens
of Guatemala, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen proceedings. We have jurisdiction
*
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).
LA/Research
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
reopen, and review de novo questions of law, including claims of due process
violations due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400
F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen as
untimely because it was filed eleven months after the BIA’s February 14, 2006
order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish that any of the
regulatory exceptions apply, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4). Nor have petitioners
established prejudice to support their claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an
ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
LA/Research 2 07-72594