Rajwinder Kaur v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

Rajwinder Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her second motion to reopen. 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 questions of law, including claims of due process violations due to ineffective assistance. 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 Kaur’s second motion to reopen as time- and number-barred, where Kaur filed the motion over four years after her order of removal became final, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(A), (C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed within ninety days of final order of removal), and where Kaur has not established that she was entitled to equitable tolling of the filing deadline due to ineffective assistance of counsel, see Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir.2011) (deadline for filing motion to reopen can be equitably tolled “when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error”). Accordingly, Kaur’s claim that her right to due process was…