Tirath Singh 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
TIRATH SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73448
Agency No. A095-399-044
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.
Tirath Singh, a native and citizen of India, 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.
FILED
OCT 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73448 2
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, 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 Singh’s motion because it
was filed more than seven months after the BIA’s November 2, 2007, order
dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh 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).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --