*1 Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Marco Magallon-Pineda, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the *2 denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales , 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Magallon-Pineda’s motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel, where Magallon- Pineda failed to establish prejudice resulting from his prior attorney’s alleged ineffective assistance. See id. at 793 (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a petitioner must demonstrate that he was prejudiced by counsel’s performance).

In light of this disposition, we do not address Magallon-Pineda’s remaining contentions.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 14-72716

[*] 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).