Vicenta Lopez-Bobadilla v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VICENTA LOPEZ-BOBADILLA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-72102
Agency No. A072-168-238
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Vicenta Lopez-Bobadilla, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her
motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
FILED
JAN 03 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of due process violations.
Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the
petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lopez-Bobadilla’s motion to
reopen where she failed to establish prejudice arising from any alleged ineffective
assistance by her former representatives. See id. at 793-94 (“[P]rejudice results
when the performance of counsel was so inadequate that it may have affected the
outcome of the proceedings.” (emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks
omitted)).
Lopez-Bobadilla’s due process claims therefore fail. See Lata v. INS, 204
F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial prejudice to
prevail on due process claim).
We reject Lopez-Bobadilla’s remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
11-72102 2

-- 2 of 2 --