Humberto Vallin 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
HUMBERTO VALLIN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73035
Agency No. A028-727-740
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 17, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Humberto Vallin, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his 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 denial of a motion to reopen, and review de
FILED
JUL 24 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-73035 2
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 Vallin’s motion to reopen on
the ground that he presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice resulting
from the alleged errors of his former counsel. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339
F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (requiring prejudice to prevail on an ineffective
assistance claim).
In light of our disposition, we need not address Vallin’s remaining
contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --