A fte r ex am in in g t h e b rie fs a n d rec or d , w e h av e c on c lu d ed th at ora l arg u m en t is * u n n ec es sa ry . T h u s, th e p et itio n for re vie w is su b m itt ed on th e b rie fs a n d rec or d
. See F ED . R. A PP . P. 34(a)( 2)(C). 

# United States Court ofAppeals

F or the Se ven th C ir cu it Ch i cago ,I l l i nois 60 604 Subm i tte d Septem ber23 , 20 10 * D eci ded October1, 20 10

B efo re IL A N A D IA M O N D R O V N E R, Cir cu i tJudg e T E R E N C E T . E V A N S, Cir cu i tJudg e A N N C L A IR E W IL L IA M S, Cir cu i tJudg e N o. 10
- 1863 V Y T A U T A S B A R A N A U SK A S, etal., P etitio ners ,
v.
E R IC H . H O L D E R, JR., A tto rneyGenera lo fthe U ni ted S tat es, Res pond e nt . Pe ti ti o n fo r Re vi ew o fa n Or dero fthe Board o fI m m i gr ati on Ap peal s. N os . A 94 04 4 7 70 , A 94 04 4 7 71 , A 94 04 4 7 72

O R D E R Vy ta ut as Ba r an au sk as , a l o ngwi thhi s wi fe an d s o n, a r e na ti ve s o fLi thua ni a, a nd to ge th er th ey p et itio n for re vie w of an ord er of th e B oa rd of Im m igr at ion A p p ea ls d ism issi ng their app eal ofan Im m igrati on Jud ge’s de cisions d en ying th eir m otion for a co nt i nua nc e an d the i r thi r d r eque stf o r a s ubs ti tu ti o n o fc o uns el
. We de ny the pe ti ti o n. NONP RE C E DE NT I AL DI S PO S I T I ON To be ci ted o nl y in acco rdance w i th F ed. R. App. P. 32 .1N o. 10
- 1863 Page 2

M or e than a y earafterBara nauskas fi rs t a rr i ved i n the U ni ted S tat es, he c ontac ted an ind ivid u al w h o p u rp or te d to be a law ye r an d as ke d for a d vic e o n lega lizin g h is s ta tu s. U nbeknownst to Bara nauskas , thi s per son fi l ed an as yl um appli cati on o n hi s be hal f
. That appl i ca ti o n a l er te d a utho r i ti es t o the f ami l y ’ s pr es en ce i n the Uni te d S ta te s, a nd the g o ve r nm en t be g anr emov alpr o ce eding s ag ains t th em. Ba r an au sk as ne ve r l ea r ne d tha t he ha d b ee n s um m o ne d t o a ppea r i n i m m i g r at i o n c o ur t, a nd whe n h e f ai l ed to a ppea r a t th e s c he du l e d h e a r i ng, a n IJ i n Pe nn s y l v a ni a o r de r e d the f a mi l y r e mov e d i n a b s e nt i a. A lm os t a ye ar lat er im m igr at ion au th or itie s fo u n d B ar an au sk as livin g in C h ica go . Aft erhe was de ta i ne d, Ba r an au sk as move d t o r eo penthe pr o ce eding s an d t o c ha ng e ve nue to the i m m i gr ati on co urt i n Chicag o. He ar gued that the o ri gi nalas yl um appli cati on had b ee n frau d u len t a n d th at h e w as u n aw ar e o f th e o u ts ta n d in g re m ov al or d er ag ain st h im
. In hi s m o ti o n, Ba r an au sk as s ta te d tha t he was “ wi l l i ngt o v o l unt ar i l y de par t wi th i n a r ea so nabl e per i o d o ft i m e. ” The IJ i n P enns y l va ni a g r an te d the mot i o n t o r eo pena nd tr an sfe rre d th e c as e t o C h ica go . O ve r th e n ex t y ea r, B ar an au sk as at te n d ed fou r im m igr at ion h ea rin gs in C h ica go . In hi s fi rs t a pp ear ance, the IJ se t Bar anauska s’ s bo nd at$5 000 and scheduled the f am i l y for “o ne fi na lhe ar i ng ” to de te r m i ne whethe r the y qua l i fi ed f o r v o l unt ar y de par tu r e. Buta t th e next hear i ng, i nstea d ofse eking vo l untarydepartur e, Bara nauskas as ked f ora continuance, ex pl aini ngtha t hi s wi fe ne ede d t o r emai n in the Uni te d S ta te s to r es o l ve c o m pl i ca ti o ns s he had experi enced fro m tr eat m ent forhepati ti s C. The IJ gr anted thi s r equest but warned that he would m ake a fi naldeci si on a t the next hear i ng. W hen Baranausk as re turned t o cour t s eve n m onths l ate r, he ha d a new la w yerwh o i nd i cate d that the f am i l y was now consi deri ng appl yi ng f oras ylum . On l earni ng o fthi s chang e in cour se, the IJ r em i nd ed Baranausk as that i ni ti al l y he had express ed no fearo fr etur ni ng to Li thuani a a nd i n f act ha d been w il ling to return volun taril y. N one th eless the IJ gran ted Ba ran au skas an oth er, m uchs ho r te r, c o nt i nua nc e an d i ns truct ed hi m tha t, i fhe i nt en ded to a ppl y f o r a sy l um , he h ad to su b m it a n ap p lica tio n atth e n ex t h ea rin g. Two we ek s l at er, Ba r an au sk as r etur ne d t o c o ur t wi thy eta no th era tt o r ne y a nd ask ed f orye t a notherco nti nuance. The ne w at torney s tat ed that she had j ust be en r eta i ned and needed m or e t i m e t o prepar e. The IJ deni ed the re quest fora continuance as w el las the a tto rney ’ s m oti on t o re pla ce Bar anauska s’ s pre vi ous c ounsel
. He then a ske d Baranausk as i fhe was pre pared to fi l e a n asy l um appli cati on a s he had been instr ucted at th e pr ev i o us pr o ce eding . When Bar an au sk as r es po nde d tha t he was no t, the IJ de emed the appli cati on abandoned, concl ud ed that Baranausk as w as nei therr eady no r w i l l i ng to de pa r t, a nd o r de r e d the f a mi l y r e mov e d.N o. 10
- 1863 Page 3

Baranausk as appeal ed to the Board o fI m m i gr ati on Ap peal s, ar gui ng tha t the IJ had er ro neousl y deni ed the re quests f ora continuance and substi tuti on o fco unseland that th es e d ec isio n s v iola te d h is rig h t t o d u e p ro c es s. T h e B oa rd d ism iss ed th e a p p ea l, concl ud i ng tha t the IJ had not er re d i n denyi ng the co nti nuance and that Baranausk as had not est abl i shed a due- proce ss vi ol ati on be cause he had not shown thatthe IJ ’ s deci si on prej ud i ced hi s ca se. On a ppea l Ba r an au sk as r ea ss er ts hi s ch al l en g e to the IJ ’ s dec i si o ns r eg ar di ngthe con tinu an ce an d the m otion to su bstitu te cou ns el. Bec au se th e B oard agreed w ith th e IJ’ s deci si ons but pro vi ded addit i onalr eas oni ng o fi ts own , we re vi ew the IJ ’ s deci si on a s su p p lem en te d by th e B oa rd
. SeeN iam v. Ashcroft, 354 F.3d 65 2, 65 5-5 6 (7 th C ir. 20 04 ). W e r evi ew the IJ ’ s deni alo fBara nauskas ’ s r equest f ora thi rd co nti nuance f orabuse of d isc re tio n . See K uc a na v. Ho lder, 130 S. C t. 82 7, 83 1 (2 01 0); Jua rez v . Ho lder, 59 9 F
. 3d 560, 565- 66 ( 7th Ci r. 20 10)
. I m m i gr ati on J ud ges have di scr eti on t o m anage thei r own cal endars, an d th ey are free to gra n t c on tin u an c es on a sh ow in g of g oo d ca u se . See 8 C. F. R. § 1003
. 29; Jua rez , 599 F.3d at56 5. B ar an au sk as arg u es th at h e w an te d a c on tin u an c e s o th at h e c ou ld co nferwi thhi s ne w l awy erabo utpo ss ibl e av enue s f o r r emai ni ngi n the Uni te d S ta te s. But by the t i m e the IJ ente re d the fi nalr em ova lo rder, the case had bee n pend i ng f ornear l y a yea r, Bara nauskas had com e t o cour t with thr ee differ ent s ets o fl aw yer s, and he had changed hi s m i nd atev er y hea ring ab out how he wis hed to proce ed. Und erthes e ci rcum sta nces, the IJ di d not abuse hi s di scr eti on in concl ud i ng tha t Bar anauska s had f ai l ed to sh ow goo d ca u se for a n ot h er co n tin u an c e. See M o z dz en v . Ho lder, N o . 0 9
- 3 0 1 7, 2 0 1 0 WL 34 63 70 5, at *4 (7t h C ir. Sep t. 7, 20 10 ). Ba r a na us k a s f a r e s n o b e t t e r o n hi s du e - pr o c e s s a r g ume nt s , wh i c h we r e v i e w de n ov o. See G utierrez -B erdin v. Ho lder, N o. 09
- 3526 , 20 10 W L 32582 67, at* 3 ( 7th Ci r. A ug. 19 , 2010 )
. To est abl i sh thatthe IJ ’ s r efusalto gr ant a co nti nuance orsubst i tute counselvi ol ate d h is rig h t t o d u e p ro c es s, B ar an au sk as n ee d ed to d em on st ra te th at th e d ec isio n “like ly affecte d the r esul t o fthe proce edi ngs. ” See A lim i v. G o nz a les , 489 F.3d 829 , 834 (7th C ir. 2007 )
. Bar anauska s has neve r appli ed f orany f or m o fr el i effro m r em ova l, and he nev er ass er ted ( m uch l ess dem onst ra ted) thatthe denie d m oti ons preve nted hi m fro m pursui ng a vi abl e m eans ofr em ai ni ng i n the U ni ted S tat es, so he c annot m ake a showing ofprej ud i ce su fficie n t t o s u st ain a d u e-p ro c es s c laim
. The peti ti on f orr evi ew i s D ENI ED
.