Jose Luis Rangel-Ledesma 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOSE LUIS RANGEL-LEDESMA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
Nos. 05-71966
05-75104
Agency No. A076-842-691
MEMORANDUM*
On Petitions for Review of Orders of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated petitions for review, Jose Luis Rangel-Ledesma, a
native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”)
FILED
SEP 24 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

05-75104 2
removal order, and the BIA’s order denying his motion to reopen proceedings
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.
Maravilla-Maravilla v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 855, 857 (9th Cir. 2004) (per curiam).
We dismiss the petition for review in No. 05-71966, and grant the petition for
review in No. 05-75104.
The BIA abused its discretion in determining that Rangel-Ledesma’s
ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not new and could have been presented
during the pendency of the appeal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (evidence must not
have been available to be presented “at the former hearing”); see also Bhasin v.
Gonzales, 423 F.3d 977, 987 (9th Cir. 2005) (explaining that 8 C.F.R. §
1003.2(c)(1) requires that the evidence must not have been available to be
presented at the former hearing before the IJ).
We do not address the petition for review in No. 05-71966 in light of our
disposition in No. 05-75104.
IN NO. 05-71966: PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
IN NO. 05-75104: PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED;
REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --