Apple Yap Rivera-Wheeler 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).
/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
APPLE YAP RIVERA-WHEELER,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71476
Agency No. A079-643-977
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Apple Yap Rivera-Wheeler, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision finding her subject to removal and
FILED
DEC 28 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

/Research 07-71476 2
granting voluntary departure. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review de novo questions of law, including claims of due process violations in
immigration proceedings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.
2005). We deny the petition for review.
We agree with the BIA that Rivera-Wheeler failed to demonstrate that the
conduct of proceedings resulted in prejudice. See Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967,
971 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge).
Rivera-Wheeler’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --