Acosta-Ariega

Acosta-Ariega v. Holder

Good Law
360 F. App'x 735
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 5, 201006-71658California221 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jose Guadalupe Huerte Duran and Casi-mira Casa Pena, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to remand and dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We dismiss the petition for review.

To the extent petitioners challenge the IJ’s underlying decision, we lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). We also lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that the evidence of hardship petitioners submitted with their motion to remand was insufficient to establish a prima facie case for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601, 603 (9th Cir. 2006).

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA failed to adequately review the evidence are neither supported nor colorable. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.