Case ID: f-appx_118/html/0290-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gerardo MENDOZA-BARRAGAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-71017.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.
    
    Decided Jan. 12, 2005.
    Frank P. Sprouls, Law Office of Ricci and Sprouls, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Michael P. Lindemann, Esq., Douglas E. Ginsburg, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before BEEZER, HALL and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gerardo Mendoza-Barragan petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252.

Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review, Ortiz v. INS, 179 F.3d 1148, 1153-54 (9th Cir.1999) (concluding that petitioners were not prejudiced by their counsel’s allegedly deficient performance because they failed to proffer evidence demonstrating eligibility for asylum).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.