Summary
finding no basis for the litigant's assertion that, as of June 15, 2011, the litigant's immigration judge erred in denying the litigant's application for asylum
Summary of this case from Sayed v. HolderOpinion
No. 10-70574.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
June 22, 2011.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A076-594-669.
Before: CANBY, O'SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Mostafa Mahmoud Mohamed, a native and citizen of Egypt, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Cui v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1289, 1290 (9th Cir. 2008), we deny the petition for review.
The IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying a continuance on the ground that Mohamed did not demonstrate good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29 (an IJ may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown); see also Sandoval-Luna, 526 F.3d at 1247 (IJ did not abuse discretion in denying a continuance where alien had no approved visa petition and no relief was immediately available).
The IJ also did not abuse his discretion by denying Mohamed's application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture because Mohamed did not establish good cause for failing to provide his fingerprints as ordered, and the IJ warned him that failure to comply would result in the denial of his applications. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.10; cf. Cui, 538 F.3d at 1293-96.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.