Blas Castillo-Tapia; 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
BLAS CASTILLO-TAPIA; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73313
Agency Nos. A075-709-088
A075-709-089
A075-709-090
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Blas Castillo-Tapia, Maria Del Carmen Lopez, and Eymard Roman Castillo
petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
denying their 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
FILED
SEP 17 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-73313 2
denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of due process violations.
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 petitioners’ motion to
reopen on the ground that petitioners failed to establish that the actions of their
former representatives may have affected the agency’s hardship determination.
See id. at 793-94 (a petitioner must establish prejudice to prevail on an ineffective
assistance claim).
In light of our disposition, we need not address petitioners’ remaining
contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --