FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 12 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARTURO LOPEZ DELGADILLO; No. 08-70958
GUILLERMINA CASTILLO DE LOPEZ,
Agency Nos. A075-736-591
Petitioners, A075-736-592
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010 **
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Arturo Lopez Delgadillo and Guillermina Castillo de Lopez, husband and
wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We
*
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).
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the claims of due
process violations in immigration proceedings. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526
F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). We deny the petition for review.
We agree with the BIA’s conclusion that petitioners failed to establish any
prejudice stemming from the IJ’s denial of their request for a continuance, because
they failed to state what testimony Dr. Morales would provide that might have
affected the outcome of the proceedings. See Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960,
965 (9th Cir. 2002) (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-70958