Josephine Medrano-Boggs 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOSEPHINE MEDRANO-BOGGS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72928
Agency No. A072-315-602
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Josephine Medrano-Boggs, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration
FILED
OCT 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-72928 2
proceedings, Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1011 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny
the petition for review.
Medrano-Boggs contends that the IJ violated her right to due process when
the IJ did not postpone her merits hearing for her United States citizen spouse’s
testimony. Medrano-Boggs’ contention fails because the IJ had already continued
her merits hearing once before to obtain her spouse’s testimony and the spouse still
did not appear. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring
error and prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).
Medrano-Boggs also contends that the IJ deprived her of due process by
failing to comply with 8 C.F.R. § 1240.1(b). She fails to show any prejudice from
the IJ’s failure to certify for the record that he, as a substitute judge, had reviewed
her record. See Lata, 204 F.3d at 1246.
Petitioner’s remaining contention is unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --