Chavarria v. United States, 739 F.3d 360, 362 (7th Cir. Jan. 9, 2014) (rejecting claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, based on affirmative misadvice of adverse immigration consequences of the plea: Chavarria's argument fails, first, because the distinction between affirmative misadvice and non-advice was not a relevant factor in Padilla. Second, the precedent, pre-Padilla, supporting the application of Strickland in this context is insufficient to satisfy Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 301, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989) (holding that to impart retroactivity, a rule must be supported by ample existing precedent).).