WEN CHENG V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 11-73826 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JAN 23 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT WEN HUEI CHENG, a.k.a. En Hui Zheng, No. 11-73826 Agency No. A095-687-729 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 21, 2014** Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. Wen Huei Cheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions 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 * 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). 11-73826 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). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Cheng s motion to reopen alleging ineffective assistance of counsel where she failed to comply with the threshold requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), and the alleged ineffective assistance was not plain on the face of the administrative record. See Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 592, 596-99 (9th Cir. 2004). In light of this disposition, we do not reach Cheng s remaining contentions. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 11-73826

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.