Case Name: Rosa Maria AGUAS MARQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-08-03
Citations: 339 F. App'x 831
Docket Number: No. 06-71064
Parties: Rosa Maria AGUAS MARQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 339
Pages: 831–832

Head Matter:
Rosa Maria AGUAS MARQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-71064.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 29, 2009.
Filed Aug. 3, 2009.
Rosa Maria Aguas Marquez, Los Ange-les, CA, pro se.
David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Barry J. Pettinato, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Rosa Maria Aguas Marquez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order denying her motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and de novo questions of law, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
Aguas Marquez's claim that an immigration consultant provided her with ineffective assistance of counsel is foreclosed by Hernandez v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1014, 1015-16 (9th Cir.2008) (holding that "knowing reliance upon the advice of a non-attorney cannot support a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel in a removal proceeding.")
Aguas Marquez's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.