Laura Mesa-Valdez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Laura Mesa-Valdez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision denying her motion to reopen. We deny the petition.
1. The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Mesa-Valdez’s motion to reopen. Mesa-Valdez did not establish a reasonable likelihood that, her children would face exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if she were removed to Mexico. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l); Mendez-Gutierrez v. Gonzales, 444 F.Bd 1168, 1171 (9th Cir.2006). Her evidence did not establish the extent of her current medical condition, what medical care she requires or why her relatives in Mexico could not provide-required care. See Patel v. INS, 741 F.2d 1134, 1137 (9th Cir.1984).
2. The BIA did not violate the Due Process Clause by denying Mesa-Valdez’s motion to reopen. Mesa-Valdez did not show a reasonable likelihood that she would prevail on her application for cancellation of removal. Because the BIA did not err in denying her motion, it did not violate her due process rights. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1013-14 (9th Cir.2010); Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000).