Daniel Mendoza-Ruiz 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DANIEL MENDOZA-RUIZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-71697
Agency No. A095-451-151
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 15, 2013**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Daniel Mendoza-Ruiz, 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, and
FILED
JAN 16 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-71697 2
review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92
(9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Mendoza-Ruiz’s motion to
reopen where he failed to show that his former attorneys’ alleged ineffective
assistance prejudiced his case. Id. at 793-94 (prejudice results when counsel’s
actions may have affected the outcome of the proceedings).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --