Leopoldo Negrete Hernandez 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).
AR/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LEOPOLDO NEGRETE HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73937
Agency No. A074-790-819
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Leopoldo Negrete Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal of
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of
FILED
JAN 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AR/Research 07-73937 2
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims
of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales,
439 F.3d 614, 620 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
Negrete contends the IJ violated due process by excluding a letter from a
doctor describing the environmental pollution in Ecatepec, Mexico. Contrary to
Negrete’s contention, the proceedings were not “so fundamentally unfair that [he]
was prevented from reasonably presenting his case.” Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d
967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). Moreover, Negrete failed to
demonstrate that consideration of the letter may have affected the outcome of the
proceedings. See id. (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --