context: Both the immigration court and the Board noted that the 180 day time period prescribed in SS 242B(c)(3)(A) could be subject to equitable tolling due to Muresan's ineffective assistance of counsel and, thus, suspended from running until Scorteanu had received actual notice.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 321 F.3d 889, 897-98
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that equitable tolling is available where petitioner's attorney engaged in fraudulent or deceptive acts
citation_a.sentence: See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897-98 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that equitable tolling is available where petitioner’s attorney engaged in fraudulent or deceptive acts); see also Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1224 (9th Cir.2002) (recognizing equitable tolling of deadlines and numerical limits on motions to reopen or reconsider during periods when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence in discovering the deception, fraud, or error).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 282 F.3d 1218, 1224
citation_b.parenthetical: recognizing equitable tolling of deadlines and numerical limits on motions to reopen or reconsider during periods when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence in discovering the deception, fraud, or error
citation_b.sentence: See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 897-98 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that equitable tolling is available where petitioner’s attorney engaged in fraudulent or deceptive acts); see also Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1224 (9th Cir.2002) (recognizing equitable tolling of deadlines and numerical limits on motions to reopen or reconsider during periods when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner acts with due diligence in discovering the deception, fraud, or error).