MEMORANDUM **

Roehl Henson Bernardino, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his motion to reopen based on ineffective 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 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 IJ did not abuse her discretion in denying Bernardino’s motion to reopen on the ground that he failed to show he was prejudiced by his former 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.