Jose Catalino Quinteros Ramos 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOSE CATALINO QUINTEROS
RAMOS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-72907
Agency No. A072-130-907
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Jose Catalino Quinteros Ramos, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
FILED
DEC 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-72907 2
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo questions of law.
Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Quinteros Ramos’s motion
to reopen where Quinteros Ramos has not established prejudice from his prior
counsel’s alleged ineffective assistance. See id. at 793-94 (prejudice results when
“the performance of counsel was so inadequate that it may have affected the
outcome of the proceedings”).
We lack jurisdiction over Quinteros Ramos’s contention that the
immigration judge failed to advise Quinteros Ramos properly about the
fingerprinting requirement because this is not a timely challenge to the agency’s
prior order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --