Case Name: Juan MENDOZA-MEJIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States; Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Respondents
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-11-03
Citations: 350 F. App'x 85
Docket Number: No. 08-2880
Parties: Juan MENDOZA-MEJIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States; Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Respondents.
Judges: Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 350
Pages: 85–85

Head Matter:
Juan MENDOZA-MEJIA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States; Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Respondents.
No. 08-2880.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 29, 2009.
Filed: Nov. 3, 2009.
Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
. Eric H. Holder, Jr. has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c).
. Janet Napolitano has been appointed to serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Juan Mendoza-Mejia, a citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Because substantial evidence supports the Board's determination that Mendoza-Mejia was not subjected to past persecution and does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution in Guatemala, we deny review of Mendoza-Mejia's claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. See Zacarias-Velasquez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 429, 432-34 (8th Cir.2007); Gitimu v. Holder, 581 F.3d 769, 774 (8th Cir.2009). Because this court lacks jurisdiction to review the Board's determination that Mendoza-Mejia failed to prove his removal would cause an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his spouse or child under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D), we also deny review of his claim for cancellation of removal. See Zacarias-Velasquez, 509 F.3d at 434. Accordingly, Mendoza-Mejia's petition is denied.