Does the British Indian Association (BIA) have any discretion in denying an untimely motion to reopen a case?

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh's untimely motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel where he failed to demonstrate he acted with the due diligence required for equitable tolling. See 8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i); Singh v. Holder, 658 F.3d 879, 884 (9th Cir. 2011) ("To qualify for equitable tolling on account of ineffective assistance of counsel, a petitioner must demonstrate . . . due diligence in discovering counsel's fraud or error . . .."); Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) (listing factors relevant to the diligence inquiry).