Eugenio Everado Camacho- Contreras 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
EUGENIO EVERADO CAMACHO-
CONTRERAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73303
Agency No. A073-982-536
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Eugenio Everado Camacho-Contreras, a native and citizen of Mexico,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying
his motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion,
FILED
OCT 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73303 2
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), we deny the petition for
review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Camacho-Contreras’ motion
to reopen because it was filed more than six years after the BIA’s March 25, 2002,
order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Camacho-
Contreras failed to demonstrate that he acted with the due diligence required for
equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (equitable tolling available
“when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as
long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”); see also Singh v. Gonzales, 491
F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2007).
Camacho-Contreras’ remaining contention is unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --