Viviana Jamal Nijmeh 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
VIVIANA JAMAL NIJMEH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-73222
Agency No. A096-759-057
MEMORANDUM*
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
FILED
NOV 19 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-73222 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 of 2 --