United States First Circuit

Petition for review of a final order of removal denying plaintiff's second motion to reopen is denied where the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination that the plaintiff failed to meet his burden under Lozada of providing sufficient detail of his counsel's alleged ineffectiveness was not arbitrary or capricious, as the evidence plaintiff submitted for the purpose of establishing the claimed ineffectiveness did not describe the terms according to which the work was to be performed or how former counsel's performance of the work was ineffective.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/05/2009
• Published 08/05/2009

Judges

• LYNCH, Chief Judge., Before LYNCH, Chief Judge, BOUDIN and LIPEZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Lisa D. Dubowski and ASK Law Group, on brief for petitioner.


• For Appellees:
  
• Tim Ramnitz, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Michael F. Hertz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Shelley R. Goad, Senior Litigation Counsel, on brief for respondent.