Gutierrez-Vidal

facts are considered “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be

compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Id. (quoting Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d

1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2006)). We review questions of law de novo. Id. “Where, as

here, the BIA summarily adopts the IJ’s decision without opinion pursuant to

C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4), we review the IJ’s decision as if it were the BIA’s decision.”

Antonio v. Garland, 58 F.4th 1067, 1072 (9th Cir. 2023) (quoting Ren v. Holder, 648

F.3d 1079, 1083 (9th Cir. 2011)).

Before this court, Petitioners raise a claim for ineffective assistance of

counsel. But to exhaust a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding prior

counsel’s performance before the BIA, this court requires the petitioner to file a

motion to reopen with the BIA and first raise the claim there. See Benedicto v.

Garland, 12 F.4th 1049, 1062 (9th Cir. 2021). Petitioners failed to do so. Thus this

court may not review the ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Suate-

2 Orellana v. Garland, 101 F.4th 624, 629 (9th Cir. 2024); see also Benedicto,

F.4th at 1062.

Petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims fail because

substantial…