Jose Flores-Venegas v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Good Law
485 F. App'x 249
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 12, 201211-71650California348 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jose De Jesus Flores-Venegas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his motion to reopen based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir.2011). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Flores-Venegas’s motion to reopen as untimely, where he filed his motion more than five months after issuance of the final order of removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i), and failed to demonstrate that ineffective assistance of counsel delayed the filing of his motion to reopen, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 678 (“[A] petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling of the deadline during periods when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of a deception, fraud, or error” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Consequently, Flores-Vene-gas’s related contention that the BIA abused its discretion by not providing a reasoned explanation for its decision…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.