Qiang Wang 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
QIANG WANG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74300
Agency No. A079-268-139
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Qiang Wang, 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
FILED
NOV 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74300 2
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 by denying Wang’s motion to reopen
because the motion was filed more than three years after the BIA’s December 1,
2004, order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and
Wang failed to demonstrate that he acted with the due diligence required to warrant
equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897.
In light of our disposition, we do not reach Wang’s remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --