T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J E OR GINA MOR A P E R DO MO, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 06- 73931 A ge nc yN o. A 079- 535- 361 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r8, 2010

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: B . F L E T C H E R , B E R Z O N , an dC A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J e or gi naM or aP e r dom o ( “ M or a ” ) pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

the B oa r d of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ s ( “ B IA ”) deci si on af fi rm i ng an i m m i grat i on j ud ge’ s ( “ IJ ”) de ni a l of he rD e c e m be r16, 2005 m ot i on t o r e ope n r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs on a c c o u n t o f

in e f f e c tiv e a s s is ta n c e o f

c o u n s e l. W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r8 U .S .C . §



# FI LED JAN 11 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

1 2 5 2 ( a ) . See al

so N ev arezN ev arezv. H

older , 5 7 2 F .3 d6 0 5 , 6 0 7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . W e gr a ntthe pe t i t i on f

orr e vi e w a nd r e m a nd. B e c au s e th e B I A a d o p te dth e I J ’s d e c is io n , w e r e v ie w th e I J ’s d e c is io n . So w e v . Mukasey , 53 8 F . 3d 12 81 , 12 85 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). W e r evi ew deni alof a m o tio n to r e o p e n f

o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . So c o

p - G o n z a lezv . I

NS , 272 F . 3d 1176, 1 1 8 7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ( e n b a n c ) . T h e B I A ab u s e s its d is c r e tio n w h e n its d e c is io n is

“ arbi trary , i rr at i on al , or contraryt o l aw . ” O n t i v e r o s -Lo p ezv . I NS , 213 F . 3d 1121, 1 1 2 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . T he B I A r e c ogni z e d tha tM or aw a s e nt i t l e d t o e qui t abl e t ol l i ng of the de a dl i ne t o f

i l e am ot i on t o r e ope n be c aus e s he w a s pr e ve nt e d f r om t i m e l yf

i l i ng be c aus e of

the i ne f f e c t i ve a s s i s t a nc e of

he rpr i orc ouns e l , E a r l yH a w ki ns , a nd a n o ta r io p o s in g a s a n a tto rn e y , J o s e C o r o n a d o . Se e I tu rr i b a rr i a v . I

NS , 321 F . 3d 8 8 9 , 8 9 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 3 ) . I ta l s o r e c o g n i z e dth a tMo r ak n e w o rs h o u l dh a v e k n o wn tha tboth C or ona do a nd H a w ki ns pe rpe tr a t e d af r aud on he rbyM a y2005, a nd m e a s u r e dM o r a ’s du e d ilig e n c e f r o m th a t d a te . W e h o ldth a t th e B I A ab u s e dits di s c r e t i on i n c onc l udi ng tha tM or a ’ s m ot i on t o r e ope n, e ve n a c c ount i ng f or e q u itab le to llin g , w a s u n tim e ly . O nc e M or al e a rne d of

the f r aud on he ri n M a y2005, s he pr om pt l ys ought th e a s s is tan c e o f

n e w c o u n s e l. Se e Fa

j a rdo v . I

NS , 30 0 F . 3d 10 19 , 10 22 (9th C i r.3

2 0 0 2 ) . I n c ir c u m s ta n c e s s u c h a s th o s e p r e s e n te dh e r e , an e w lyh ir e dlaw y e rs h o u ld b e a f f o r d e dar e a s o n ab le p e r io dto o b ta in a n dr e v ie w h is c lie n t’s im m ig r a tio n f ile s o th a t h e c a n p r o v id e c o m p e te n t le g a l a d v ic e . C f . A lbi l lo-D e L eon v. G on zales , 4 1 0 F .3 d1 0 9 0 , 1 1 0 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ; O nt i ve ros-L op ez , 2 1 3 F .3 da t 1 1 2 5 ( “W h ile [ pe t i t i one r ] m a yha ve be e n abl e t o a tt e s tt o hi s ow n unde r s t a ndi ng w i th hi s pr i or coun se l abse ntthe re cord, he and h i s new coun se l coul d n otbe expect ed t o i dent i fy th e s p e c if

ic s o f c o u n s e l’s d e f

ic ie n t p e r f

o rm a n c e w ith o u t r e f

e r e n c e to a n a c c u r a te a n ds u b s tan tia llyc o m p le te r e c o r do f th e f ilin g s a n dp r o c e e d in g s b e f o r e th e I J ” ) . M ora’ s new l y r et ai ned cou nselac t ed di l i gent l y t o o bt ai n and re vi ew her f i l e; c ons e que nt l y , w e e qui t abl yt ol l the be gi nni ng of the l i m i t a t i ons pe r i od f orf i l i ng the m ot i on t o reopen u nt i l O ct ob er13 , 20 05 , w hen M ora r evi ew ed her f i l e w i th n ew c o u n s e l. B e c au s e th e m o tio n w a s f ile dw ith in 1 8 0 d a y s o f

r e v ie w in g th e f

ile , it w a s tim e ly . See 8 U . S . C . § 1 22 9a(b)( 5)(C )( i ). W e a lso h o ldth at th e B IA ab u se dit s d iscr etio n in co n clu d in g th at M o ra ’s cl ai m w as barr ed because she f ai l ed t o com pl y w i th the re qu i re m ent s of M at te rof L oz ada , 19 I & N D ec . 63 7 (19 88 ). M ora f i l ed a c om pl ai ntagai nsther form ercoun se l w i th the st at e bar , and h erform ercoun se l conceded hi s def i ci ency in f a ilin g to ap p e a ra t th e h e a r in g w h e r e p e titio n e rw a s o r d e r e dr e m o v e din abs e nt i a . W e c onc l ude tha tM or as ubs t a nt i a l l yc om pl i e d w i th L oz ada a nd tha tthe4

pu rposes of L oz ada h a v e b e e n f u llys e rv e d . See Morales Apo l i na r v . Mukasey , 514 F .3 d8 9 3 , 8 9 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ; Ro dr i g u ez -La r i

zv . I NS , 2 8 2 F .3 d1 2 1 8 , 1 2 2 7 ( 9 th C i r. 20 02 ). W e G R A N T the pe t i t i on f orr e vi e w a nd RE MAND t o the B IA for f urther pr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e ntw i th thi s di s pos i t i on.