Samuel Rodriguez Lopez v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SAMUEL RODRIGUEZ LOPEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72489
Agency No. A074-804-492
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Rodriguez Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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,
FILED
JUL 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72489 2
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 Rodriguez Lopez’s motion
to reopen as untimely because he filed the motion almost eight years after the
BIA’s January 31, 2000, order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Rodriguez Lopez
failed to establish that he acted with the due diligence required for equitable
tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897; cf. Ghahremani v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d
993, 1000 (9th Cir. 2007).
In light of our disposition, we do not reach Rodriguez Lopez’s remaining
contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --