NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 21 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FABIAN MANCINAS-HERNANDEZ, No. 18-71562 AKA Alonso Mancinas-Hernandez,

Agency No. A201-022-232

Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 15, 2019** Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Fabian Mancinas-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to remand. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to remand, and review de novo questions of law.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Vargas-Hernandez v. Gonzales, 497 F.3d 919, 921, 923 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not err, abuse its discretion, or violate due process in denying Mancinas-Hernandez’s motion to remand, where he did not demonstrate that the new evidence submitted would likely have changed the outcome of his case. See Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008) (a motion to remand must show that “if proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would likely change the result in the case” (citation omitted)); Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 18-71562