Sarabjit Singh v. Merrick Garland ( 2021 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED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