Gholamshahi

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Kourosh Gholamshahi petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA’s”) denial of his motion to reopen his deportation proceedings in order to reapply for asylum and withholding of deportation under the Convention Against Torture. Because the facts are known to the parties, we repeat them only as needed.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Gholamshahi has not established his status as a Baha’i. See Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1487 (9th Cir.1997). Because Gholamshahi has not established a prima facie case of eligibility for the underlying relief sought — here, asylum' — the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See Konstantinova v. INS, 195 F.3d 528, 530 (9th Cir.1999); Watkins v. INS, 63 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir.1995).

Gholamshahi claims that his due process rights were violated at his initial asylum hearing in 1989 by the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ’s”) failure to appoint an interpreter to assist him, even though he did not request an interpreter at the time. But Gholamshahi has not demonstrated prejudice from any failure to translate portions of the asylum proceedings. See United States…