FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA ESTELA ROQUE DE No. 09-70255
ESCOBEDO,
Agency No. A077-093-637
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010 **
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Maria Estela Roque de Escobedo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision that she is inadmissible for participating in alien
smuggling and ineligible for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8
*
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).
U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785,
791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Escobedo
participated in alien smuggling. See Urzua-Covarrubias v. Gonzales, 487 F.3d
742, 748-49 (9th Cir. 2007). The record reflects Escobedo provided a birth
certificate and false information to the border inspector in order to assist an alien’s
attempt to enter the United States unlawfully. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(E)(i) (an
alien is inadmissible if she has “knowingly encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted,
or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the United States in violation of
law”).
The agency correctly determined that Escobedo is ineligible for cancellation
of removal because she was granted Lawful Permanent Resident status in 2004 and
her Notice to Appear was served in 2006. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(1)-(2)
(requiring cancellation applicants to have resided continuously in the United States
for seven years “after having been admitted in any status”); id. at § 1229b(d)(1)
(period of continuous residence ends “when the alien is served a notice to appear”).
Escobedo’s contention that she may impute presence from her father is not
persuasive because she has not shown her father was ever admitted as a lawful
2 09-70255
permanent resident. Cf. Cuevas-Gaspar v. Holder, 430 F.3d 1013, 1029 (9th Cir.
2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 09-70255