Opinion
No. 16-72197
03-20-2018
RAMANJEET KAUR, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Agency No. A206-456-018 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Ramanjeet Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying her motion to remand following an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision ordering her removed in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to remand, and review de novo constitutional claims and questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Kaur's motion to remand for failure to establish exceptional circumstances, where the IJ had denied her motions to change venue. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii); 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1); Hernandez-Vivas v. INS, 23 F.3d 1557, 1559 (9th Cir. 1994) (the mere filing of a request to change venue does not absolve petitioner of her obligation to appear for the scheduled hearing).
There is no error in denying Kaur's contentions that the agency violated due process in her underlying removal proceedings. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (an alien must show error and substantial prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.