The Eleventh Circuit has granted a petition for review filed by a Guatemalan man whose motion to reopen for ineffective assistance of counsel was denied because he reported his attorney to the immigration court's own disciplinary counsel rather than to a state bar.
The Court held that nothing in Matter of Lozada limits the "appropriate disciplinary authority" requirement to state bars, and that a complaint filed with EOIR's disciplinary counsel, which now has robust sanction authority modeled on the ABA Model Rules, both strictly and substantially complies with Lozada's purposes of deterring meritless claims and policing the immigration bar. The Court joined the majority of circuits in holding that substantial compliance with Lozada is sufficient and vacated the BIA's denial of reopening.
The full text of Pasqual-Andres v. U.S. Attorney General can be found here: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202212848.pdf