NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 23 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT J DOLORES VALDIVIA CRUZ, No. 17-70090

Petitioner, Agency No. A206-344-681 v.

MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 17, 2022** Before: S.R. THOMAS, PAEZ, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

J Dolores Valdivia Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture, and

*

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). cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion an IJ’s decision to exclude evidence because it was untimely filed. Taggar v. Holder, 736 F.3d 886, 889 (9th Cir. 2013). We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate due process by excluding untimely-filed evidence for failure to show good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.31(h) (“If an application or document is not filed within the time set by the immigration judge, the opportunity to file that application or document shall be deemed waived.”); see also Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (error and prejudice are required to prevail on a due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 17-70090