Case Name: Jose R. CASTRO-LOPEZ and Maria L. Moreno-Aguilar, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-05
Citations: 427 F. App'x 582
Docket Number: No. 09-72667
Parties: Jose R. CASTRO-LOPEZ and Maria L. Moreno-Aguilar, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 427
Pages: 582–583

Head Matter:
Jose R. CASTRO-LOPEZ and Maria L. Moreno-Aguilar, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-72667.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 5, 2011.
Filed April 15, 2011.
Smirna Ayala, Law Offices of Ronzio & Associates, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.
Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Nicole ThomasDorris, Edward Earl Wiggers, Esquire, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jose R. Castro-Lopez and Maria L. Moreno-Aguilar, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying their motion to reopen 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, and review de novo constitutional claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners' motion to reopen on the ground that they failed to show they were prejudiced by their former representative's alleged conduct. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 899-90 (9th Cir.2003) (prejudice results when the performance of counsel "was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.