ESTEVEZ PORTILLO v. WHITAKER (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Mailin Estevez-Portillo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination. Zarate v. Holder, 671 F.3d 1132, 1134 (9th Cir. 2012). We review de novo claims of due process violations. Lianhua Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Estevez-Portillo did not show the requisite ten years of continuous physical presence to establish eligibility for cancellation of removal, where she testified she entered the United States after her fifteenth birthday, which is months short of the point at which she needed to establish presence. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A); Zarate, 671 F.3d at 1134 (“Under the substantial evidence standard, a petitioner can obtain reversal only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.”).

The record does not support Estevez-Portillo’s contention that the IJ was aggressive in questioning her, such that the IJ was no longer impartial, or otherwise violated due process. See Lianhua Jiang, 754 F.3d at 741 (no lack of IJ impartiality, where IJ’s questions were an attempt to clarify the relationship between the alien and a witness, and not an indication of bias).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.