Frederic Mazariegos Santos 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FREDERIC MAZARIEGOS SANTOS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71968
Agency No. A078-073-859
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 8, 2012**
Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Frederic Mazariegos Santos, a native and citizen of Guatemala, 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
FILED
AUG 14 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71968 2
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 Mazariegos Santos’s motion
to reopen as untimely where he filed the motion more than seven years after his
final order of removal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (motion to reopen must be filed
within 90 days of final order), and failed to show the due diligence required to
obtain equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897
(equitable tolling is available where petitioner demonstrates due diligence in
discovering the deception, fraud, or error that prevented timely filing).
Because the BIA’s untimeliness determination is dispositive, we do not
reach Mazariegos Santos’s contentions concerning the departure bar and the merits
of his ineffective assistance and due process claims.
Contrary to Mazariegos Santos’s contention, the BIA did not abuse its
discretion by addressing the issue of changed country conditions where his motion
to reopen included a request for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under
the Convention Against Torture, as well as evidence of recent economic
developments in Guatemala. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii).
Mazariegos Santos’s unopposed request for judicial notice is granted.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --