Sandra Violeta Ramirez Mazariegos 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SANDRA VIOLETA RAMIREZ
MAZARIEGOS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70543
Agency No. A070-956-004
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 6, 2012**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Sandra Violeta Ramirez Mazariegos, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision
denying her motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §1252. We
FILED
MAR 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-70543 2
review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and we review de
novo claims of ineffective assistance in immigration proceedings, Mohammed v.
Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We grant the petition for review
and remand.
The BIA abused its discretion when it denied Mazariegos’s motion to reopen
for failure to establish prejudice, because Mazariegos presented a plausible claim
for relief, and her notary’s failure to file a brief to the BIA may have affected the
outcome of her removal proceedings. See Singh v. Holder, 658 F.3d 879, 887 (9th
Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --