Krystle Macapagal Agustin 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
KRYSTLE MACAPAGAL AGUSTIN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-71342
Agency No. A094-880-382
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.
Krystle Macapagal Agustin, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her request for a continuance. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
FILED
NOV 16 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-71342 2
denial of a continuance, Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009),
and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Agustin’s request for a
continuance where she failed to show good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; cf.
Ahmed, 569 F.3d at 1012-15 (good cause shown for continuance to await
adjudication of I-140 appeal).
Agustin’s request regarding prosecutorial discretion is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --