Travnikova

Travnikova v. Gonzales

Good Law
135 F. App'x 906
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 2005No. 03-72742California424 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Valtentina Travnikova and her husband, Alexander Patyk, petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), summarily affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their motion to reopen. Petitioners moved to reopen on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1105a (1996), as amended by IIRIRA § 309(c)(4), and we deny the petition.

*907 Petitioners are natives and citizens of Ukraine who were subject to deportation proceedings for failing to depart the United States after being admitted as nonimmigrant visitors. The IJ granted voluntary departure in lieu of deportation on March 5, 1997. Petitioners, having waived their appeal, had 90 days from that date in which to file a motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 3.2 (c)(2) (1996). Petitioners missed the deadline by a wide margin, filing their motion to reopen on March 25, 2002.

Petitioners seek equitable tolling of the deadline. The deadline on a motion to reopen may be equitably tolled by a former representative’s deception, fraud, or…

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.