FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PATRICIA ALVAREZ GONZALEZ, No. 07-74114
Petitioner, Agency No. A079-539-849
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 16, 2010 **
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Patricia Alvarez Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her
motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
*
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).
JT/Research
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and de novo claims of due process
violations in immigration proceedings. 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 Alvarez Gonzalez’s motion
to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than one year after the
BIA’s September 26, 2005, order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Alvarez
Gonzalez failed to establish that she acted with the due diligence required to
warrant tolling of the 90-day filing deadline, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889,
897 (9th Cir. 2003) (equitable tolling is available to petitioner who is prevented
from filing due to deception, fraud or error, and exercises due diligence in
discovering such circumstances).
In light of our disposition, we need not reach Alvarez Gonzalez’s contention
that her former attorney’s performance caused her prejudice.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
JT/Research 2 07-74114