Case Name: Juan Carbajal GONZALEZ; Patricia Soria Garcia, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-13
Citations: 387 F. App'x 699
Docket Number: No. 07-72646
Parties: Juan Carbajal GONZALEZ; Patricia Soria Garcia, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 387
Pages: 699–700

Head Matter:
Juan Carbajal GONZALEZ; Patricia Soria Garcia, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-72646.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010.
Filed July 13, 2010.
Meredith R. Brown, Glendale, CA, for Petitioners.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum Fax, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Juan Carbajal Gonzalez and Patricia So-ria Garcia, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying their motion to continue and pretermitting their applications for cancellation. We dismiss the petition for review.
Petitioners have informed the court that their U visa applications have been denied. Because the underlying relief sought has been denied, petitioners' challenge to the denial of the continuance to pursue that relief is moot. Contrary to petitioners' arguments, their due process claim fails because they have not shown prejudice. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).
We dismiss the petition for review as moot.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.