Opinion
No. 08-72175.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed October 26, 2010.
William Kiang, Law Offices of Kiang and Kiang, San Gabriel, CA, for Petitioner.
Surell Brady, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Anthony N. Norwood, Office of Immigration Litigation, 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.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A097-359-953.
Before: O'SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Dongwen Lin, a native and citizen of China, 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 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 592, 595 (9th Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lin's motion because he failed to comply with the requirements set forth in Matter ofLozada, 19 I. N. Dec. 637, 639 (BIA 1988), because Lin did not include sufficient evidence that he had informed the attorney of the allegations against him, and the alleged ineffective assistance is not plain on the face of the record. See Reyes, 358 F.3d at 594, 597-99.