Case Name: Cesar CHALI-ALVAREZ; Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-14
Citations: 356 F. App'x 888
Docket Number: No. 08-3531
Parties: Cesar CHALI-ALVAREZ; Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
Judges: Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 356
Pages: 888–889

Head Matter:
Cesar CHALI-ALVAREZ; Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
No. 08-3531.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 6, 2009.
Filed: Dec. 14, 2009.
Cesar Chali-AIvarez, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
Allen Warren Hausman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. is automatically substituted for former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey as respondent in this case.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Cesar Chali-AIvarez and Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed an immigration judge's denial of asylum and cancellation of removal. Because substantial evidence supports the BIA's determination that petitioners were not subjected to past persecution and do not have a well-founded fear of future persecution in Guatemala, we deny review of petitioners' asylum claims. See Khrystoto-dorov v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 775, 781 (8th Cir.2008) (standard of review); Malonga v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 546, 552 (8th Cir.2008) (defining persecution); Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 337 F.3d 983, 986-87 (8th Cir.2003) (changed country conditions in Guatemala after 1996 peace accords). Because this court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA's determination that Chali-AIvarez failed to prove his removal would cause an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his children, under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D), we also deny review of his claim for cancellation of removal. See Zacarias-Velasquez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 429, 434 (8th Cir.2007) (standard of review).
Accordingly, the petition for review is denied.
. Petitioners do not challenge the denial of withholding of removal. See Averianova v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 890, 892 n. 1 (8th Cir.2007) (aliens waived claim by failing to present argument on appeal).