07-70550•Patricia Perez Rocha v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General
07-70550Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit19 de jan. de 2010
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).
RA/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PATRICIA PEREZ ROCHA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70550
Agency No. A095-443-749
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Patricia Perez Rocha, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
FILED
JAN 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
RA/Research 07-70550 2
reconsider its decision denying her motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed
by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss the petition for review.
Nearly four months after the BIA issued its final decision, on June 29, 2006,
Rocha filed a motion to reconsider, where she asserted an ineffective assistance of
counsel claim. The BIA denied the motion because it was untimely, because
Rocha failed to establish that equitable tolling applied, and because Rocha failed to
show that she complied with Matter of Lozada, 19 I & N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988) or
that she was prejudiced by her former attorney’s actions. Rocha fails to challenge
any of these findings. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th
Cir. 1996) (issues not raised in the opening brief are deemed waived).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Rocha’s contentions regarding the BIA’s
May 26, 2004 order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision
denying her application for cancellation of removal, because this petition for
review is not timely as to that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th
Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.