SALVADOR SIFONTES V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 12-72111 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OCT 25 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS SALVADOR ORLANDO SIFONTES, Petitioner, No. 12-72111 Agency No. A091-614-656 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 15, 2013** Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Salvador Orlando Sifontes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) denying his motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA s denial of a * 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). motion to reopen and review de novo claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Sifontes s motion to reopen due to his failure to demonstrate prejudice from his former attorney s improper filing of his first motion to reopen and failure to inform him of his right to petition for review of the agency s rejection of that motion, where his first motion to reopen presented no plausible grounds for success on the merits either in the first instance before the BIA or on review before this court. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that the absence of plausible grounds for relief rebuts the presumption of prejudice); cf. Singh, 367 F.3d at 1190 (stating that the presumption of prejudice is sustained if the petitioner s claim could plausibly succeed on the merits ). To the extent that Sifontes seeks to renew his motion for a stay of removal, we deny this request as moot. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 12-72111

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.