Jorge Julio Heredia Mendez 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).
NHY/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JORGE JULIO HEREDIA MENDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-75669
Agency No. A095-196-395
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.
Jorge Julio Heredia Mendez, 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
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NHY/Research 06-75669 2
U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen,
and review de novo claims of due process violations based on ineffective
assistance of counsel. 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 Heredia Mendez’s motion to
reopen because he failed to establish prejudice. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339
F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel
claim, petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --