Hilda Teresa Villa-Sandoval v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HILDA TERESA VILLA-SANDOVAL,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72969
Agency No. A073-912-630
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Hilda Teresa Villa-Sandoval, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her
appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying her application for cancellation
of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
SEP 17 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

10-72969 2
substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination,
Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-851 (9th Cir. 2004), and review de
novo claims of due process violations, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th
Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Villa-Sandoval’s
documentary and testimonial evidence was conflicting and insufficient to meet her
burden of proving ten years of continuous residence in the United States. See
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A); Lopez-Alvarado, 381 F.3d at 851-53 (finding that
petitioners had met their burden where nothing contradicted the detailed
documentary and testimonial evidence presented by petitioners).
Contrary to Villa-Sandoval’s contention, she is not entitled to the
opportunity to present her hardship claim, because the failure to prove ten years of
continuous presence is dispositive. See Lopez-Alvarado, 381 F.3d at 850 (to
qualify for the discretionary relief of cancellation of removal, an alien must, as a
threshold matter, have been physically present in the United States for a continuous
period of no less than ten years).
Villa-Sandoval’s contention that the BIA made an implicit adverse
credibility determination is not supported by the record.

-- 2 of 3 --

10-72969 3
Villa-Sandoval’s contention that the BIA engaged in impermissible fact
finding is not supported by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --