Matharo v. Holder

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 13 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GARY PAUL MATHARO, aka Gary Paul No. 07-71054
Singh Matharoo,
Agency No. A072-142-314
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Gary Paul Matharo, 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 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
KS/Research
We review for abuse of discretion the 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 Matharo’s motion because it
was filed more than 6 years after the BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2),
and Matharo failed to establish grounds for equitable tolling, see Singh v.
Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2007) (requiring petitioner to act with
due diligence to definitively learn of the ineffective assistance after he becomes
suspicious of it).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
KS/Research 2 07-71054