Martha Rodriguez Mejia 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARTHA RODRIGUEZ MEJIA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72138
Agency No. A079-610-946
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Martha Rodriguez Mejia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen
based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
OCT 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72138 2
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen.
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Rodriguez Mejia’s motion to
reopen as untimely because it was filed nearly two years after the BIA’s final
removal order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Rodriguez Mejia did not show she
was entitled to equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (deadline for
filing motion to reopen can be equitably tolled “when a petitioner is prevented
from filing because of deception, fraud, or error”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --