MEMORANDUM **

Claudia Osuna-Estrada, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen proceedings due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction *249 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo constitutional claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel claims. 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 Osuna-Estrada’s March 12, 2009, motion to reopen on the ground that she failed to show she was prejudiced by her counsel’s conduct. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 899-90 (9th Cir. 2003) (prejudice results when the performance of counsel “was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.