Sergio Augusto Jolon Foronda 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SERGIO AUGUSTO JOLON
FORONDA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70499
Agency No. A075-728-603
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sergio Augusto Jolon Foronda, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo
FILED
FEB 28 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70499 2
ineffective assistance of counsel claims. 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 Foronda’s motion to reopen
because it was untimely, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), Foronda failed to
demonstrate changed country conditions to qualify for the regulatory exception to
the time limit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii), and Foronda failed to establish that
the alleged ineffective assistance may have affected the outcome of his
proceedings, 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).
The government’s motion to strike is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --