Bernardino Gabriel-Perez; 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
BERNARDINO GABRIEL-PEREZ; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71817
Agency Nos. A076-356-337
A076-356-260
A072-402-852
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Bernardino Gabriel-Perez, Venancia Perez De Gabriel and Eduardo Gabriel-
Perez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ order denying their motion to reopen proceedings based on
ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
FILED
MAR 01 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-71817 2
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Ghahremani v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d 993, 997
(9th Cir. 2007), we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen because the motion was filed nearly five years after their deportation order
became final, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and petitioners failed to establish that
they acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v.
INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003) (equitable tolling available “when a
petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as
the petitioner acts with due diligence”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --