Domingo Rogelio Ayala-Ortiz 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DOMINGO ROGELIO AYALA-ORTIZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-71698
Agency No. A028-964-747
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 13, 2012**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Domingo Rogelio Ayala-Ortiz, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen deportation proceedings
based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
NOV 16 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-71698 2
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen.
Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011). We deny the petition for
review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Ayala-Ortiz’s motion to
reopen as untimely where he filed the motion twenty years after the March 14,
1990, final order of deportation, and fourteen years after the September 30, 1996,
statutory motions deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Ayala-Ortiz failed to
show the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see
Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 679.
In light of our disposition, we do not reach Ayala-Ortiz’s contention
regarding the BIA’s interpretation of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.3(e). Ayala-Ortiz’s
remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --