OSCAR LOPEZ-MELARA V. JEFFERSON SESSIONS, III, No. 16-72565 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 19 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OSCAR LOPEZ-MELARA, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 16-72565 Agency No. A208-362-516 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 12, 2018** Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. Oscar Lopez-Melara, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review 17 of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 18 immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We have 19 jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo constitutional claims 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). 1 questions of law, and we review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual 2 determinations. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We 3 deny the petition for review. 4 Lopez-Melara has not established that the agency violated due process by 5 ignoring or misrepresenting his testimony. See Gutierrez v. Holder, 662 F.3d 1083, 6 1091 (9th Cir. 2011) (“A court will grant a petition on due process grounds only if 7 the proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from 8 reasonably presenting his case.” (citations and quotation marks omitted)). 9 Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Lopez-Melara engaged in 10 an affirmative act in support of alien smuggling, where he testified that he 11 provided money for his brother’s trip to the United States and that his brother did 12 not have permission to enter the United States. See Urzua Covarrubias v. 13 Gonzales, 487 F.3d 742, 749 (9th Cir. 2007) (alien smuggling finding supported by 14 substantial evidence where there is “an affirmative act of help, assistance, or 15 encouragement” (citations omitted)); Villavicencio v. Sessions, 879 F.3d 941, 945 16 (9th Cir. 2018) (“The BIA’s factual findings are conclusive unless any reasonable 17 adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” (citation omitted)). 18 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 16-72565
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
