NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 17 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SARABJIT SINGH, No. 20-71978 Petitioner, Agency No. A079-587-819 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 14, 2021** Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Sarabjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s untimely motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel where he failed to demonstrate he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i); Singh v. Holder, 658 F.3d 879, 884 (9th Cir. 2011) (“To qualify for equitable tolling on account of ineffective assistance of counsel, a petitioner must demonstrate . . . due diligence in discovering counsel’s fraud or error . . ..”); Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) (listing factors relevant to the diligence inquiry). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 20-71978 20-71978 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Sarabjit Singh v. Merrick Garland 17 September 2021 Agency Unpublished e35cf00bbf9f1db3741ee1d4136e6b56f44977e3
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals