Case ID: f-appx_88/html/0250-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ernesto SANTOS-BERNARDO, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-71431.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 17, 2004.
    
    Decided Feb. 25, 2004.
    James J. Kelly, Law Offices of Richard D. Flesicher, Reno, NV, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, NVL-District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Las Vegas, NV, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Regina Byrd, Attorney, M. Jocelyn Wright, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ernesto Santos-Bernardo, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming an immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo due process claims, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition.

Santos-Bernardo did not demonstrate that his counsel’s failure to timely file his cancellation of removal application caused prejudice. See id. at 902-03. Accordingly, Santos-Bernardo’s due process challenge fails. See id.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.