MEMORANDUM **

Julio Cesar Alvitres-Campos, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for *833 review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from an order of removal of an immigration judge (“IJ”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s factual determinations and review de novo due process claims. Vilchez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 1195, 1198-99 (9th Cir. 2012). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Alvitres-Campos had not satisfied his burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that he is present in the United States pursuant to a prior lawful admission, because Alvitres-Cam-pos did not offer any evidence to corroborate his claim that he had entered the United States on a tourist visa. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(2)(B) (“[T]he [alien must] demonstrate[] by clear and convincing evidence that he or she is lawfully present in the United States pursuant to a prior admission”).

Moreover, Alvitres-Campos has not demonstrated that the agency’s refusal to continue his removal proceedings caused him to suffer any prejudice because, at the time of the hearing, Alvitres-Campos’s eligibility for adjustment of status remained only a speculative possibility. See Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1247 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (rejecting for lack of prejudice a due process claim based on an IJ’s denial of a continuance because the petitioner had not shown that he was eligible for adjustment of status at the time of the hearing).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.