Narendra Prasad v. Eric H. Holder Jr.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Eva Martha Rosales De Vega and Conrrado Vega Perez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. *196 INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen because it was filed more than three years after the BIA’s October 1, 2004, order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to demonstrate that they acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (equitable tolling available “when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”); see also Singh v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2007).
In light of our disposition, we do not reach petitioners’ remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Eva Martha ROSALES DE VEGA; Conrrado Vega Perez, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
- Status
- Unpublished