Meza-Sandoval v. Ashcroft

88 F. App'x 251

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: February 25, 2004
• Docket: No. 02-71421; Agency No. A75-250-480
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Agustina Meza-Sandoval, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s order denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and suspension of deportation. We have jurisdiction to review due process challenges, and we review de novo. Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594, 599 (9th Cir.2002). We deny the petition.

Petitioner’s first contention, that the BIA’s decision “without opinion” violates due process, is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 850-51 (9th Cir.2003).

Petitioner next contends that she had a “settled expectation” that the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (“IIRIRA”) would apply to her because she applied for asylum prior to the effective date of the permanent rules of the IIRIRA. This contention is foreclosed by Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1108 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.