Court Opinion

ID: 8464417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-05 08:29:34.714776+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:12.202883
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM **
Dalvir Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his 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 BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as untimely because the motion was filed almost two and a half years after the BIA’s September 9, 2004, order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). The BIA properly determined that Singh was not entitled to equitable tolling because he did not demonstrate that he exercised due diligence in pursuing his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (equitable tolling available “when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence in discovering the deception, fraud, or error.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.