Cesar Chali-Alvarez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. , 356 F. App'x 888 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 08-3531
    ___________
    Cesar Chali-Alvarez; Timotea               *
    Rodriguez-Smith,                           *
    *
    Petitioners,                   *
    *   Petition for Review of
    v.                                   *   an Order of the Board
    *   of Immigration Appeals.
    Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General1     *
    of the United States,                  *       [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Respondent.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: November 6, 2009
    Filed: December 14, 2009
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Cesar Chali-Alvarez and Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, natives and citizens of
    Guatemala, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
    (BIA), which affirmed an immigration judge’s denial of asylum and cancellation of
    1
    Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General
    Eric H. Holder, Jr. is automatically substituted for former Attorney General Michael
    B. Mukasey as respondent in this case.
    removal.2 Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that
    petitioners were not subjected to past persecution and do not have a well-founded fear
    of future persecution in Guatemala, we deny review of petitioners’ asylum claims.
    See Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey, 
    551 F.3d 775
    , 781 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of
    review); Malonga v. Mukasey, 
    546 F.3d 546
    , 552 (8th Cir. 2008) (defining
    persecution); Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 
    337 F.3d 983
    , 986-87 (8th Cir. 2003)
    (changed country conditions in Guatemala after 1996 peace accords). Because this
    court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Chali-Alvarez failed
    to prove his removal would cause an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to
    his children, under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D), we also deny review of his claim for
    cancellation of removal. See Zacarias-Velasquez v. Mukasey, 
    509 F.3d 429
    , 434 (8th
    Cir. 2007) (standard of review).
    Accordingly, the petition for review is denied.
    ______________________________
    2
    Petitioners do not challenge the denial of withholding of removal. See
    Averianova v. Mukasey, 
    509 F.3d 890
    , 892 n.1 (8th Cir. 2007) (aliens waived claim
    by failing to present argument on appeal).
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-3531

Citation Numbers: 356 F. App'x 888

Judges: Murphy, Colloton, Shepherd

Filed Date: 12/14/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024