Case ID: f-appx_552/html/0771-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WEN HUEI CHENG, a.k.a. En Hui Zheng, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 11-73826.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 21, 2014.
    
    Filed Jan. 23, 2014.
    Larry D. Wayne, Law Offices of Larry Wayne A., San Gabriel, CA, for Petitioner.
    Wen Huei Cheng, pro se.
    Pei Dai, pro se.
    Rebekah Nahas, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Wen Huei Cheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir.2011). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Cheng’s motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel where she failed to comply with the threshold requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 687 (BIA 1988), and the alleged ineffective assistance was not plain on the face of the administrative record. See Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 592, 596-99 (9th Cir.2004).

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Cheng’s remaining contentions.

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