Case ID: f-appx_474/html/0646-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ramon PRECIADO-JIMENEZ and Maria Delia Preciado, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 10-73888.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted July 17, 2012.
    
    Filed July 19, 2012.
    Philippe Dwelshauvers, Esquire, Fresno, CA, for Petitioners.
    Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Luis E. Perez, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ramon Preciado-Jimenez and Maria Delia Preciado, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.

The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ fourth motion to reopen as untimely and numerically-barred. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c).

The Board did not abuse its discretion in declining to equitably toll the time and number limitations on motions to reopen on the ground that petitioners did not establish due diligence or prejudice from the alleged ineffective assistance of their prior attorney. See Iturribarria v. I.N.S., 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.