Kaur, et al v. Holder, No. 06-72398 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 22 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RANJEET KAUR, No. 06-72398 Petitioner, Agency No. A079-245-428 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 13, 2010 ** Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Ranjeet Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying her motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We * 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). review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. 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 concluding that equitable tolling was unavailable for Kaur s claims because she failed to demonstrate diligence where she admitted to knowing that counsel was unprepared at the time of her hearing, but continued to retain his services throughout the appellate process. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2); Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003) (tolling available to individuals who are prevented from filing due to deception, fraud or error, and use due diligence in discovering deception, fraud or error). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 06-72398

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.