Abdul Matin v. Loretta E. Lynch
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Abdul Matin, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) decision affirming the-Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition for review.
1. Matin’s asylum application was filed more than one year after he entered the United States, and Matin is unable to establish ineffective assistance of counsel to excuse the untimely filing. See Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1088-91 (9th Cir.2010). The retainer agreement, signed by Matin, stated that Matin’s attorney was under no obligation to file the asylum application until he received his full fee. Ma-tin does not claim that he paid the full fee prior to the deadline; because the relevant facts are undisputed, we have jurisdiction over this issue. Husyev v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 1172, 1179-81 (9th Cir.2008). We agree with the BIA that Matin provided insufficient evidence of payment to establish that the untimely filing was due to ineffective assistance of counsel. See Ta-mang, 598 F.3d at 1090 .