¶2 Emeteria J. Ramirez-Medrano, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review *820 of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
¶3 We agree with the BIA that Ramirez-Medrano failed to show that she was prejudiced by her former counsel’s performance. See Blanco v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 714, 722 (9th Cir.2008) (no prejudice from counsel’s failure to call a witness because additional testimony would not have likely changed the outcome); see also Ortiz v. INS, 179 F.3d 1148, 1153-54 (9th Cir.1999) (attorney’s failure to elicit critical testimony regarding petitioner’s asylum claim was insufficient to establish prejudice).
¶4 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.