Marineh Karapetian; Arman Karapeti Soultanian 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARINEH KARAPETIAN; ARMAN
KARAPETI SOULTANIAN,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-73309
Agency Nos. A079-518-081
A079-518-082
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 11, 2013**
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Marineh Karapetian and Arman Karapeti Soultanian, natives and citizens of
Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective
FILED
FEB 13 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-73309 2
assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d
672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen as untimely where they filed the motion seven years after their removal
order became final, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (motion to reopen must be filed
within 90 days of final order), and failed to show the due diligence required for
equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 679 (equitable
tolling is available to a petitioner who is prevented from filing because of
deception, fraud or error, and exercised due diligence in discovering such
circumstances).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --