Opinion
No. 17-72688
04-25-2019
ERNESTO SALAS-ANDAZOLA, AKA Ernesto Salas, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Agency No. A091-867-824 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Ernesto Salas-Andazola, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's order of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the agency's denial of a continuance, and review de novo questions of law. Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err or abuse its discretion in denying for lack of good cause Salas-Andazola's request for a continuance, where he had eleven months to prepare for his final hearing, and he failed to explain the relevance of the evidence he sought to obtain. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; Ahmed, 569 F.3d at 1012 (listing factors to consider). We reject Salas-Andazola's contention that the agency failed to consider relevant factors or insufficiently articulated its decision. See Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that the agency applies the correct legal standard where it expressly cites and applies relevant case law in rendering its decision); Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990-91 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding the BIA adequately considered evidence and sufficiently announced its decision).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.