Opinion
No. 11-70061 Agency No. A077-216-024
09-18-2012
ALEJANDRO VARONA ALONZO, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Alejandro Varona Alonzo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's order denying his 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, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Varona Alonzo's motion to reopen for failure to comply with the requirements set forth in Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), where the ineffective assistance he alleges is not plain on the face of the record. See Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 592, 596-99 (9th Cir. 2004).
We do not consider the extra-record evidence submitted for the first time with Varona Alonzo's opening brief because the court's review is limited to the administrative record. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A). __PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.