Humran, et al v. Holder, No. 06-75097 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED OCT 06 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOHAMED HAMOOD HUMRAN, aka Mohammed Hamood Humran Nagi, No. 06-75097 Agency No. A078-192-982 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 4, 2010** San Francisco, California Before: BEEZER, KLEINFELD, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Mohamed Hamood Humran, a native and citizen of Yemen, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA s denial of a motion to reopen and review * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). de novo claims of due process violations, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005), and deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Petitioner s motion to reopen because his prior counsel had not been retained to provide the services that Petitioner claimed counsel failed to perform, including the filing of a petition for review with this court. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 900-01 (9th Cir. 2003) (incompetent representation where counsel failed to prepare and file suspension of deportation application in accordance with agreement). It follows that Petitioner s due process challenge fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a due process violation). PETITION DENIED. 2

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.