Cerda-Becerra v. Holder , 444 F. App'x 992 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            JUL 25 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    MARIA CERDA-BECERRA,                             No. 07-71953
    Petitioner,                       Agency No. A098-219-283
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted July 12, 2011 **
    Before:        SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    Maria Cerda-Becerra, 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 (“IJ”) decision pretermitting her application for cancellation
    of removal. We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review de novo
    *
    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).
    questions of law and claims of due process violations, Mohammed v. Gonzales,
    
    400 F.3d 785
    , 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review.
    The IJ properly determined that Cerda-Becerra abandoned her application
    for cancellation of removal because it was not filed by the IJ’s deadline. See
    
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.31
    (c) (IJ may set filing deadlines and deem waived an application
    not filed by the deadline); see also Matter of R-R-, 
    20 I. & N. Dec. 547
    , 549 (BIA
    1992) (“The Board has long held that applications for benefits under the Act are
    properly denied as abandoned when the alien fails to timely file them.”). It follows
    that Cerda-Becerra’s due process rights were not violated. See Lata v. INS, 
    204 F.3d 1241
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a petitioner to prevail on a due
    process claim).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                      07-71953
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-71953

Citation Numbers: 444 F. App'x 992

Judges: Schroeder, Alarcón, Leavy

Filed Date: 7/25/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024