GARCIA v. HOLDER, 418 Fed.Appx. 681 (9th Cir. 2011)
Raul Torres GARCIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., AttorneyGeneral, Respondent.
No. 09-70601.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Submitted February 15, 2011.[fn*]
Filed March 7, 2011.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.][fn*] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P.34(a)(2).
Raul Torres Garcia, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.Page 682
OIL, Paul F. Stone, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A095-293-175.
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM[fn**]
[fn**] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Raul Torres Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889,894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA acted within its discretion in denying as untimely Torres Garcia's motion to reopen where Torres Garcia filed the motion almost two years after the BIA's final order of removal,see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and failed to establish that he acted with the due diligence required to warrant equitable tolling of the filing deadline, seeIturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Page 709