Martha Magdalena Miranda Mendez; Veronica Athalia Vazquez Miranda 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARTHA MAGDALENA MIRANDA
MENDEZ; VERONICA ATHALIA
VAZQUEZ MIRANDA,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70194
Agency Nos. A096-063-264
A096-063-265
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Martha Magdalena Miranda Mendez and Veronica Athalia Vazquez
Miranda, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s
FILED
JUL 16 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70194 2
decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir. 2000), and
we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Miranda
Mendez did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where her
testimony and application indicated that she departed the United States for Mexico
in October 1994 and that she remained there for a period greater than 90 days. See
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) (departure in excess of 90 days breaks continuous physical
presence).
The agency did not err in denying cancellation relief to Vazquez Miranda
where she did not demonstrate that she had a qualifying relative. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1229b(b)(1).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --