opportunity to be represented by counsel, prepare an application for ... relief, and to present testimony and other evidence in support of the application, he or she has been provided with due process.”); Kotasz v. INS, 31 F.3d 847, 850 n. 2 (9th Cir.1994) (“In order to make out a due process violation ..., the alien must show that ‘a better translation would have made a difference in the outcome of the hearing.’ ” (citation omitted)). The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Orozco-Avarez’s motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel on the ground that Orozco-Avarez failed to demonstrate prejudice from the alleged ineffective assistance, because he did not explain what material evidence he was prevented from introducing at his hearing. Cf. Nehad, 535 F.3d at 971 (<HOLDING>). Orozco-Avarez waived his contention that the
holding that the district court should grant a motion for a new trial when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice emphasis added recognizing burden is on alien when alien is removable holding that prejudice may result when the alien is prevented from  reasonably presenting his or her case  citation omitted emphasis added recognizing that due process claims require showing that proceedings were so fundamentally unfair that she was prevented from reasonably presenting her case holding that an application is  pending from the time it is first filed  emphasis added