U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

Salam v. Holder

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided October 5, 2009 · Clifton, Rawlinson, Silverman

333 F. App'x 302

Counsel

Errol I. Horwitz, Cooper & Lewis, Woodland Hills, CA, for Petitioner., CAC-District, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Manuel A. Palau, Genevieve Holm, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Tareq Salam, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen alleging *303ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 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, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA acted within its discretion in denying Salam’s motion to reopen as untimely because it was not filed within 90 days of the BIA’s February 27, 2003, order, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and because Salam presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice, 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.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.