Pervinder Singh 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
PERVINDER SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70686
Agency No. A096-151-086
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Pervinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70686 2
conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the
petition for review and remand.
The BIA abused its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen where it
relied on Singh’s failure to respond to attorney Dhariwal’s November 13, 2006,
supplemental response to Singh’s allegation of ineffective assistance but the record
demonstrates that the supplemental response was not served on Singh. See Singh
v. I.N.S., 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (the BIA’s denial of a motion to
reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”). We
remand for the agency to provide Singh with an opportunity to respond to
Dhariwal’s November 13, 2006, supplemental response.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --