Nazaryan

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Aramais Nazaryan (“Petitioner”) petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming and adopting the decisions of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Petitioner’s motion to reopen and reconsider his deportation proceedings so that he could apply for derivative asylum through *85 his first wife. The facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, and we do not repeat them here. “We review the denial of a motion to reopen [or reconsider] for abuse of discretion,” and under that standard, we must deny the petition for review “[u]nless the BIA acted ‘arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law* ” in denying the motion. Singh v. INS, 213 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting Eide-Kahayon v. INS, 86 F.3d 147, 149 (9th Cir.1996)); accord INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 322-23 , 112 S.Ct. 719 , 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). 1 To meet that exacting standard, Petitioner raises two arguments.

First, Petitioner asserts that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in his prior deportation proceedings because his accredited representative’s performance was constitutionally deficient and because after that representative…