Casique-Camacho

Casique-Camacho v. Ashcroft

Good Law
92 F. App'x 547
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 30, 2004No. 02-74272California353 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*548 MEMORANDUM **

Salomon Casiqne-Camacho and members of his family, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of their “motion to reconsider and reopen.” 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , grant the petition for review, and remand for further proceedings.

Petitioners’ original appeal to the BIA was rejected because their attorney failed to include the required fee. The attorney then refiled the appeal along with the fee, but the BIA dismissed the appeal as untimely. The Board incorrectly noted that the attorney did not file a Notice of Entry of Appearance.

In finding Petitioners’ subsequent pro se motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel to be untimely, the BIA elected not to decide whether equitable tolling should apply. Reviewing this purely legal question de novo, see Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc), we conclude that the BIA ruled erroneously. “This court ... recognizes equitable tolling of deadlines and numerical limits on motions to reopen or reconsider during periods when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error,…

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.