Ricson Tampubolon 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RICSON TAMPUBOLON,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70089
Agency No. A079-643-132
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Ricson Tampubolon, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d
FILED
JUL 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70089 2
592, 595 (9th Cir. 2004), and we review de novo claims of due process violations
in immigration proceedings, Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir. 2000). We
deny the petition for review.
The BIA properly concluded that Tampubolon failed to establish ineffective
assistance of counsel, because his attorney’s decision to withdraw his application
for asylum constituted a tactical decision. See Magallanes-Damian v. INS, 783
F.2d 931, 934 (9th Cir. 1986). Tampubolon has not established prejudice to
support his due process claim. See Lata, 204 F.3d at 1246.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --