Case Name: Jorge A. GALINDO-RODRIGUEZ; Maria Victoria Galindo; Diana Galindo, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-07-23
Citations: 103 F. App'x 329
Docket Number: No. 02-73487
Parties: Jorge A. GALINDO-RODRIGUEZ; Maria Victoria Galindo; Diana Galindo, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 103
Pages: 329–330

Head Matter:
Jorge A. GALINDO-RODRIGUEZ; Maria Victoria Galindo; Diana Galindo, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-73487.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 16, 2004.
Decided July 23, 2004.
Karla Kraus, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, San Francisco, CA, Joan E. Smiley, Esq., Alison R. Drucker, Esq., Richard M. Evans, Esq., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: FARRIS, KOZINSKI and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
1. The Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in determining that petitioners' ineffective assistance of counsel claim was barred by res judicata. See Sharma v. INS, 89 F.3d 545, 547 (9th Cir.1996).
2. The Board failed to address petitioners' newly available evidence pertaining to extreme hardship. The case is remanded to allow the Board to address the effect, if any, of this evidence. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 — 18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).
REMANDED.
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.