Erika Bermudez Salazar 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).
SS/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ERIKA BERMUDEZ SALAZAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70356
Agency No. A097-103-146
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Erika Bermudez Salazar, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for cancellation of
FILED
JAN 11 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

SS/Research 07-70356 2
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the BIA’s factual findings, Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093
(9th Cir. 2002), and review de novo claims of due process violations in
immigration proceedings, Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir. 2001). We deny
the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Bermudez
Salazar is not eligible for cancellation of removal because she has presented no
evidence that she has a qualifying relative as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D).
See Molina-Estrada, 293 F.3d at 1093-94.
Bermudez Salazar’s due process claim fails because she did not request a
continuance. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error
for due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --