Jose Jesus Delgadillo-Dominguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming without opinion the immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. Petitioner contends that no asylum case could ever properly be streamlined by the BIA because such cases invariably involve a “novel fact situation.” We reject this contention because not every fact-based case is “novel in the eyes of the law.” See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 852 (9th Cir.2003). Petitioners’ contention that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate due process is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d at 849-52 (<HOLDING>). Pursuant to Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741
holding that the bias streamlining procedure does not violate an aliens due process rights holding that the defendant bears the burden of proof and that such a disposition does not violate the due process clause holding that negligent inaction by a jail officer does not violate due process holding that imposition of more severe sentence following trial de novo does violate defendants due process rights holding that doctrine does not violate due process