Garcia Gonzalez v. Gonzales
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Gabriel Garcia Gonzalez, 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 application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination, Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir.2004), and review de novo questions of law, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Garcia Gonzalez did not meet his burden of establishing continuous physical presence because Garcia Gonzalez repeatedly testified that he did not enter the United States until 1997, four years before his Notice to Appear was issued. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A).
Garcia Gonzalez’s equal protection challenge regarding the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act is foreclosed by our decision in Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594, 602-03 (9th Cir.2002).
Gonzalez’s remaining contentions are not supported by the record.