Singh v. Ashcroft
Docket: No. 02-71360; Agency No. A73-428-573
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; September 22, 2003; Federal Appellate Court
Amarjeet Singh, a citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision denying his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) and reviews for abuse of discretion. Singh claimed he did not receive the BIA's prior order dismissing his appeal, which hindered his ability to file a timely appeal. The BIA's denial of the motion was deemed not an abuse of discretion as it had mailed the notice to the last address provided by Singh’s counsel, who failed to inform the BIA of any address changes. The court referenced Garcia v. INS, affirming that due process is satisfied if notice is sent in a manner likely to reach the alien and noted that it is the petitioner’s responsibility to notify the court of address changes (Sequiera-Solan v. INS). Singh's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not addressed because it was not presented to the BIA, thus depriving the court of jurisdiction to consider it (Cortez-Acosta v. INS). The court also did not consider Singh’s other arguments regarding the Immigration Judge’s decision as they were unrelated to the merits of the motion to reopen. The petition for review is denied, and this decision is not to be published or cited except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.