Case Name: Luis Alberto ROMERO-MORA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-22
Citations: 225 F. App'x 704
Docket Number: No. 05-72590
Parties: Luis Alberto ROMERO-MORA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 225
Pages: 704–705

Head Matter:
Luis Alberto ROMERO-MORA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-72590.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2007 .
Filed March 22, 2007.
Luis Alberto Romero-Mora, Eloy, AZ, pro se.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, District Director, Office of the District Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Phoenix, AZ, Robbin K. Bla-ya, Esq., Greg D. Mack, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: KOZINSKI, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Luis Alberto Romero-Mora, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") order of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Cabrera-Alvarez v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1006, 1009 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
Romero-Mora was convicted of an aggravated felony, rendering him removable and barring him from cancellation of removal relief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G) (defining a theft offense, including receipt of stolen property, as an aggravated felony). Romero-Mora's claim fails because he has not shown that additional time would have changed the outcome of his proceedings and thus that he was prejudiced by the IJ's refusal to continue his case. See Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring an alien to demonstrate prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).
Romero-Mora's remaining contentions lack merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.