Viviana Nijmeh v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           NOV 19 2012
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    VIVIANA JAMAL NIJMEH,                             No. 11-73222
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A096-759-057
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted November 13, 2012 **
    Before:        CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    Viviana Jamal Nijmeh, a native and citizen of Chile and a citizen of Jordan,
    petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing
    her appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is
    governed by 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review for abuse of discretion the agency’s
    *
    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).
    denial of a continuance. Ahmed v. Holder, 
    569 F.3d 1009
    , 1012 (9th Cir. 2009).
    We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
    The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Nijmeh’s request for a
    continuance where Nijmeh failed to show good cause. See 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.29
    ;
    Ahmed, 
    569 F.3d at 1012-15
    . It follows that Nijmeh’s due process claim fails. See
    Lata v. INS, 
    204 F.3d 1241
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial
    prejudice for a due process violation).
    We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
    Nijmeh failed to show the requisite hardship for cancellation of removal. See
    Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 
    424 F.3d 926
    , 930 (9th Cir. 2005).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
    2                                  11-73222