Rosalba Aquino-Garcia 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ROSALBA AQUINO-GARCIA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71190
Agency No. A079-539-716
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 14, 2013**
Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Rosalba Aquino-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review de novo claims of due process violations. Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d
FILED
AUG 19 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-71190 2
592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for
review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that the evidence
Aquino-Garcia submitted with her motion to reopen was insufficient to warrant
reopening and she did not establish prima facie eligibility for relief, where the
evidence presented concerns the same grounds involved in the original
discretionary decision. See id. at 600-01.
Aquino-Garcia’s due process claim fails because the record shows the BIA
considered the hardship to her son and she cannot establish prejudice. See Lata v.
INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and prejudice to prevail
on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --