Case Name: Roselle Tapere VIRTUCIO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-01
Citations: 398 F. App'x 242
Docket Number: No. 08-75206
Parties: Roselle Tapere VIRTUCIO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 398
Pages: 242–243

Head Matter:
Roselle Tapere VIRTUCIO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-75206.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
Filed Oct. 1, 2010.
Christopher Allan Reed, Esquire, Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, Long Beach, CA, for Petitioner.
Lynda Do, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, 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
Roselle Tapere Virtucio, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying her application for adjustment of status. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.Sd 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), we deny the petition for review.
The agency properly denied Virtucio's application for adjustment of status because she failed to establish eligibility to adjust. See 8 U.S.C. § 1255(c)(7) (an applicant for adjustment of status based on employment must maintain lawful nonimmigrant status at the time she applies for adjustment).
Virtucio's remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.