Edy Gonzalez-Soria v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 441 F. App'x 437 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          JUN 29 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    EDY GONZALEZ-SORIA, a.k.a. Edy                   No. 10-72002
    Gonzalez Soria,
    Agency No. A076-271-861
    Petitioner,
    v.                                             MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted June 15, 2011 **
    Before:        CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    Edy Gonzalez-Soria, 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 (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of
    removal and denying his motion to continue. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
    *
    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).
    § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical
    presence finding, Landin-Zavala v. Gonzales, 
    488 F.3d 1150
    , 1151 (9th Cir. 2007),
    for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to continue, and de novo claims of
    constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey,
    
    526 F.3d 1243
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). We deny the petition for
    review.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Gonzalez-
    Soria did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where the record
    indicates that he was deported from the United States in 1997. See Landin-Zavala,
    
    488 F.3d at 1153
     (deportation or removal terminates the accrual of physical
    presence).
    The IJ did not abuse his discretion or violate due process in denying a
    continuance because Gonzalez-Soria did not demonstrate good cause. See 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.29
     (an IJ may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown); Lata
    v. INS, 
    204 F.3d 1241
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a petitioner to
    prevail on a due process claim).
    Gonzalez-Soria’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                     10-72002
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-72002

Citation Numbers: 441 F. App'x 437

Judges: Canby, Fisher, O'Scannlain

Filed Date: 6/29/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023