Katalin Eva Horvath 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KATALIN EVA HORVATH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-70002
Agency No. A029-456-331
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.
Katalin Eva Horvath, a native and citizen of Hungary, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her motion to reopen proceedings.
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 --

11-70002 2
denial of a motion to reopen, and de novo questions of law and constitutional
claims. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny
the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Horvath’s motion to
reopen for failure to show ineffective assistance of counsel where her former
counsel requested relief under sections 212(c) and (h), and where Horvath failed to
show eligibility for such relief. Id. at 793-94 (a petitioner must show
incompetence and establish prejudice to prevail on an ineffective assistance claim);
Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1050, 1054-55 (9th Cir. 2005) (amendment
of the definition of aggravated felony applies to convictions entered “before, on, or
after” Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996’s
enactment date).
Horvath’s contention that her removal would violate international law is
unavailing. Padilla-Padilla v. Gonzales, 463 F.3d 972, 979-80 (9th Cir. 2006).
Horvath’s equal protection claim is foreclosed by Armendariz-Montoya v.
Sonchik, 291 F.3d 1116, 1122-23 (9th Cir. 2002).
Horvath’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --