Nicolas Perez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
NICOLAS PEREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74215
Agency No. A075-262-309
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Nicolas Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
FILED
JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74215 2
the agency’s continuous physical presence determination, Lopez-Alvarado v.
Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 851 (9th Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that Perez met his burden of
establishing continuous physical presence where he failed to provide sufficient
evidence supporting his presence from September 1987. See Singh-Kaur v. INS,
183 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir. 1999) (evidence does not compel a conclusion
contrary to the agency’s where there is “[t]he possibility of drawing two
inconsistent conclusions from the evidence”) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --