
    Imelda Haidy UMBAS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-74927.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted June 8, 2012.
    Filed June 18, 2012.
    Cindy S. Chang, Law Offices of Cindy S. Chang, Walnut, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Oil, Andrew Oli-veira, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    
      Before: B. FLETCHER and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and MENDEZ, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The Honorable John A. Mendez, District Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Imelda Haidy Umbas, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of her motion to remand to the Immigration Judge based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the denial of the motion to remand for abuse of discretion. Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir.2004). We review the administrative findings of fact regarding counsel’s performance for substantial evidence. Monjaraz-Munoz v. INS, 327 F.3d 892, 895 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review and the request to remand.

Even assuming the performance of Um-bas’s multiple attorneys was deficient, she has not shown prejudice. “Prejudice is found when the performance of counsel was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings.” Ortiz v. INS, 179 F.3d 1148, 1153 (9th Cir.1999). Umbas has failed to demonstrate how her counsel’s performance affected the outcome of her case. While Umbas could have better presented her case, the record does not support a conclusion that she would otherwise have been entitled to relief.

PETITION DENIED 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     