Solis-Arenas

MEMORANDUM **

Ulises Solis-Arenas (“Solis”) seeks review of a final order of removal of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), denying his second motion to reopen and/or reconsider. Solis contends that the BIA should have granted his motion because he was denied effective assistance of counsel. He also argues that an exception to the numerical limits on motions to reopen should apply so that his motion is not number-barred.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b) and review the BIA’s ruling on a motion to reopen for an abuse of discretion. Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc) (citation omitted). We review a claim involving an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo. Dearinger ex rel. Volkova v. Reno, 232 F.3d 1042, 1044-45 (9th Cir.2000).

The regulation governing a motion to reopen in immigration court provides that a party may file only one motion to reopen removal proceedings unless one of the statutory exceptions applies. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). 1 Solis does not argue that one of the statutory exceptions applies; instead, Solis is attempting to bring himself within a narrow exception to the numerical limit on…