MEMORANDUM **

Ciro Flores-Flores, 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”) decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination, Gutierrez v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2008), and review de novo questions of law, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Flores-Flores did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where the record contains a Form 1-826, Notice of Rights and Request for Disposition, which indicates that Flores-Flores knowingly and voluntarily accepted voluntary departure. Cf. Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 619-20 (9th Cir. 2006) (insufficient evidence that alien knowingly and voluntarily accepted voluntary departure where record did not contain the Form 1-826 and petitioner’s testimony suggested that he accepted return due to misrepresentations by immigration officers).

Flores-Flores’ claim that the agency’s reliance on the Form 1-826 violated due process fails because Flores-Flores did not demonstrate prejudice. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).

Flores-Flores’ remaining contentions are unavailing.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.