Lianjun Teng 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
LIANJUN TENG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72916
Agency No. A099-371-171
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Lianjun Teng, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen based
on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
FILED
APR 14 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-72916 2
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and
review de novo questions of law, including claims of due process violations due to
ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92
(9th Cir. 2005). We grant the petition for review and remand for further
proceedings.
The BIA abused its discretion in denying Teng’s motion for failure to
comply with the requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA
1988), because Teng demonstrated substantial compliance where he submitted a
detailed declaration explaining his reasons for not filing a disciplinary complaint
against his attorney. See Lo v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 934, 937-38 (9th Cir. 2003)
(sufficient compliance with Lozada where petitioner, inter alia, explained absence
of bar complaint).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --