Eduardo Guerrero-Ochoa v. Eric Holder, Jr.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 22 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EDUARDO GUERRERO-OCHOA, No. 10-71570 Petitioner, Agency No. A078-536-191 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. Eduardo Guerrero-Ochoa, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion for a continuance. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the * 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 motion for a continuance, Cui v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1289, 1290 (9th Cir. 2008), and de novo questions of law, Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir. 2001). We deny the petition for review. The IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying Guerrero-Ochoa’s motion for a continuance because he failed to show good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; Cui, 538 F.3d at 1292. It follows that Guerrero-Ochoa’s due process claim fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim). Guerrero-Ochoa’s remaining contention is unpersuasive. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 10-71570