Kattra

Kattra v. Holder

Good Law
345 F. App'x 289
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 10, 2009No. 05-70387California1,192 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Boutros Albert Kattra (“Kattra”), a native and citizen of Lebanon, asks us to review the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review denials of motions to reopen under an abuse of discretion standard. Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (citing Sharma v. INS, 89 F.3d 545, 547 (9th Cir.1996)). Reversal is only appropriate where the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.” Id. (citing Ahwazi v. INS, 751 F.2d 1120, 1122 (9th Cir.1985)).

In his motion to reopen before the Immigration Judge (“IJ”), Kattra was represented by James L. Rosenberg. 1 Rosen *291 berg argued that Kattra’s prior counsel failed to advise the immigration court that Kattra was the beneficiary of an approved labor petition. The motion did not name Kattra’s prior counsel, but explained that prior counsel had resigned from the state bar. Accordingly, the motion explained that it did not conform to the requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988) because the state bar lacked jurisdiction over Kattra’s prior…

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.