Domingo Nunez-Espinoza v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

06-71035Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit14 dic 2009

Testo completo

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JT/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOMINGO NUNEZ-ESPINOZA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-71035
Agency No. A092-672-039
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Domingo Nunez-Espinoza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion for a
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JT/Research 06-71035 2
continuance and his applications for a waiver under former Immigration and
Nationality Act § 212(c) and for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion
for continuance, Nakamoto v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 874, 883 n.6 (9th Cir. 2004), and
review de novo questions of law, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.
2000). We deny the petition for review.
The IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying Nunez-Espinoza’s motion for
a continuance because Nunez-Espinoza did not establish good cause for failing to
provide his fingerprints as ordered, and the IJ warned him that failure to comply
would result in the denial of his applications. See Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526
F.3d 1243, 1246-47 (9th Cir. 2008); cf. Cui v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1289, 1293-95
(9th Cir. 2008). It follows that Nunez-Espinoza’s due process claim fails. See
Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to establish a due
process violation).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.