Full Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROSALIA VAZQUEZ-CORNEJO, No. 21-1066 Agency No. Petitioner, A216-397-184 v. MEMORANDUM* TODD BLANCHE, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 27, 2026** Before: SILVERMAN, FORREST, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. Rosalia Vazquez-Cornejo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial * 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). evidence whether the agency erred in applying the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard to a given set of facts. Gonzalez-Juarez v. Bondi, 137 F.4th 996, 1003 (9th Cir. 2025). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Vazquez- Cornejo has not shown exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her United States citizen daughters. See id. at 1006 (petitioner must show hardship “substantially beyond the ordinary hardship that would be expected when a close family member leaves the country” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). We reject as unsupported by the record Vazquez-Cornejo’s contentions that the agency misapplied the hardship standard and failed to consider all the evidence and relevant factors. We reject as both unexhausted and unsupported Vazquez- Cornejo’s contention that she was deprived of a neutral adjudicator. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 21-1066