
    Lucio ROSAS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-71365.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 10, 2015.
    
    Filed March 16, 2015.
    Lucio Rosas, Hawthorne, CA, pro se.
    Brendan Paul Hogan, Esquire, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Lucio Rosas, 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 decision denying his request for a continuance and entering an order of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

Rosas sought a continuance of his removal proceedings in order to file a motion to vacate the state convictions that rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. Rosas’ motion to vacate has now been denied. Oklahoma v. Rosas, No. CM-1997-00242 (June 20, 2013). Accordingly, his challenge to the denial of the continuance to pursue that relief is moot. See Pedrozar-Padilla v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d 1362, 1364 n. 2 (9th Cir.2007); see also United States v. Strong, 489 F.3d 1055, 1059 (9th Cir.2007) (“An appeal is moot when, by virtue of an intervening event, a court of appeals cannot grant any effectual relief whatever in favor of the appellant.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     