Maria Guadalupe Mendoza Madrigal v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA GUADALUPE MENDOZA
MADRIGAL,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-72007
Agency No. A078-081-026
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an
Immigration Judge’s Decision
Submitted March 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Maria Guadalupe Mendoza Madrigal, a native and citizen of Mexico,
petitions for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.31(a) that she did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in
Mexico, and thus is not entitled to relief from her reinstated removal order. We
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
MAR 23 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-72007
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
IJ’s factual findings, Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016),
and we review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration
proceedings, Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the
petition for review.
We reject, as unsupported by the record, Mendoza Madrigal’s contention
that the IJ violated her due process rights or otherwise failed to adequately review
the asylum officer’s determination. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.
2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim).
Apart from her due process contentions, Mendoza Madrigal does not
challenge the IJ’s determination that she did not have a reasonable fear of
persecution or torture in Mexico, and therefore has waived any such challenge.
See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (a petitioner waives an
issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --