Cheryl Brigitte Zambarrano- Rutledge 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
CHERYL BRIGITTE ZAMBARRANO-
RUTLEDGE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74228
Agency No. A029-084-602
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Cheryl Brigitte Zambarrano-Rutledge, 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 removal order. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
FILED
OCT 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74228 2
agency’s finding of removability, Nakamoto v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 874, 881 (9th
Cir. 2004), and de novo questions of law, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785,
791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that the government met
its burden of proving that Zambarrano-Rutledge was removable for obtaining
permanent residence in the United States through a fraudulent marriage where she
voluntarily admitted to the Customs and Border Patrol officer that she had married
a United States citizen solely to obtain lawful residence in the United States. See
Nakamoto, 363 F.3d at 882; see also Barragan-Lopez v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 899,
905 (9th Cir. 2007). Zambarrano-Rutledge’s due process claim therefore fails. See
Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a petitioner to
prevail on a due process claim).
Zambarrano-Rutledge’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --