Aidee Leticia Losoya Garcia 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).
SS/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AIDEE LETICIA LOSOYA GARCIA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74811
Agency No. A096-061-235
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Aidee Leticia Losoya Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8
FILED
FEB 24 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

SS/Research 07-74811 2
U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen.
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 895-96 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition
for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Losoya Garcia’s motion to
reopen as untimely because it was filed ninety-one days after the BIA’s final order
of removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed
within ninety days of final order of removal), and Losoya Garcia did not show she
was entitled to equitable tolling, see Iturribarria, 321 F.3d at 897 (deadline for
filing a motion to reopen can be equitably tolled “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 --