Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8659681
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Gasparyan v. Mukasey
No. 8659681 · Decided March 26, 2008
No. 8659681·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
March 26, 2008
Citation
No. 8659681
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Grigor Gasparyan and Katerina Malatchyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely and refused to apply equitable tolling, because petitioners did not present any evidence to indicate that they acted with due diligence once they became suspicious of their counsel’s deficient representation. See Singh v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 1090, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2007) (equitable tolling requires evidence of prompt actions taken to discover counsel’s deficient representation). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Grigor Gasparyan and Katerina Malatchyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistan
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Grigor Gasparyan and Katerina Malatchyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistan
02INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.
03The BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely and refused to apply equitable tolling, because petitioners did not present any evidence to indicate that they acted with due diligence once they
042007) (equitable tolling requires evidence of prompt actions taken to discover counsel’s deficient representation).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Grigor Gasparyan and Katerina Malatchyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistan
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Gasparyan v. Mukasey in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 26, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8659681 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.