Serafin Campos-Soria; Rosa Cuamba Rodriguez 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
RB/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SERAFIN CAMPOS-SORIA; ROSA
CUAMBA RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72884
Agency Nos. A072-665-306
A072-665-320
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Serafin Campos-Soria and Rosa Cuamba Rodriguez, husband and wife and
natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen and
FILED
NOV 30 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

RB/Research 07-72884 2
reconsider. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and de novo claims of due
process violations, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in
immigration proceedings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.
2005). We deny the petition for review.
We agree with the BIA’s conclusion in its July 11, 2007, order that
petitioners presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice, and thus their
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel fails. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339
F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel
claim a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --