Moustafa El Sayed Haridy 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MOUSTAFA EL SAYED HARIDY,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72497
Agency No. A095-618-096
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Moustafa El Sayed Haridy, a native of Saudi Arabia and citizen of Egypt,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) 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
FILED
OCT 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-72497 2
denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo due process claims. 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 Haridy’s motion to reopen
because he failed to show that he was prejudiced by his former counsel’s conduct.
See id. at 793-94 (prejudice results when “the performance of counsel was so
inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings” (internal
quotation marks omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --