Kaur

Kaur v. Mukasey

Good Law
270 F. App'x 515
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 2008Nos. 05-70400, 05-73897California316 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

*516 In these consolidated petitions, Kulwin-der Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen deportation proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel (05-70400), and its subsequent order denying her motion to reconsider (05-73897). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petitions for review.

In No. 05-70400, the BIA did not abuse its discretion when it determined that Kaur’s motion to reopen exceeded the numerical limitations. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2) (a party may file only one motion to reopen removal proceedings).

In No. 05-73897, although the BIA should have construed Kaur’s motion as a motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, see Ray v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 582 , 585 n. 3 (9th Cir.2006) (claims of ineffective assistance require the introduction of new facts, and are properly raised in a motion to reopen, not a motion to reconsider), the error is immaterial because the BIA…

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.