Case ID: f-appx_274/html/0580-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Said El MOUHTAJ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-72194.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2008.
    
    Filed April 21, 2008.
    Parmjeet Kaur Randhawa, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Richard M. Evans, Andrew Oliveira, Thankful T. Vanderstar, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The BIA didn’t abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen. Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS, 213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2000). To reopen his case, petitioner needs to show ineffective assistance of counsel, which requires petitioner to establish “plausible grounds for relief.” Siong v. INS, 376 F.3d 1030, 1038 (9th Cir.2004). However, there is no evidence in the administrative record that supports petitioner’s asylum, withholding of removal or Convention Against Torture claims, because the transcripts of petitioner’s hearing before the IJ and of the IJ’s oral decision weren’t included in the administrative record. The BIA explicitly told petitioner that such transcripts wouldn’t be prepared, unless he “address[ed] the need for a transcript in [his] argument to the [BIA].” Petitioner, though, didn’t raise this issue before the BIA.

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