MEMORANDUM
Because Velazquez’s counsel did not show he obtained his client’s consent to the motion to dismiss he filed on her behalf, the motion is denied. We will consider this case on the merits.
Because Velazquez has not shown that any prejudice resulted from the Immigration Judge’s alleged failure to inform her of the potential for pre-conclusion voluntary departure, any right to due process was not violated. See United States v. Calles-Pineda, 627 F.2d 976, 978 (9th Cir.1980); In Re R-S-H, 23 I. & N. Dec. 629, 644 (BIA 2003). PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.