Magdalena Garcia De Aguirre v. Loretta E. Lynch , 623 F. App'x 448 ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 25 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MAGDALENA GARCIA DE AGUIRRE, No. 13-74423
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-654-818
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Magdalena Garcia de Aguirre, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s denial of a continuance. We have jurisdiction under 8
U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for a
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
continuance and review de novo constitutional claims. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey,
526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate Garcia de Aguirre’s due
process rights by denying her an eighth continuance to request revalidation of her
previously revoked I-130 petition, where Garcia de Aguirre had no qualifying
relative currently willing and able to file the affidavit of support necessary to
revalidate her petition, and the possibility that her future daughter-in-law might file
the affidavit was speculative. See id., 526 F.3d at 1247 (no abuse of discretion in
denying a motion for a continuance where the relief sought was not available to
petitioner); Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (to prevail on a due
process challenge, an alien must show error and prejudice).
Contrary to Garcia de Aguirre’s contention, the BIA provided sufficient
reasoning and detail in its opinion. See Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990
(9th Cir. 2010) (“What is required is merely that [the BIA] consider the issues
raised, and announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing court to
perceive that it has heard and thought and not merely reacted.” (citation and
quotation marks omitted)).
Garcia de Aguirre’s request for mediation is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED
2 13-74423