Carrillo-Maldonado
Carrillo-Maldonado v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Juan Carrillo-Maldonado and Marina Hernandez-Vega, natives and citizens of Mexico, appeal the BIA’s final order of removal. The BIA found that because the charging document was not filed until after April 1, 1997, they were no longer statutorily eligible for the pre-Ulegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (“IIRIRA”) remedy of suspension of deportation but instead could only seek cancellation of removal under IIRIRA. Petitioners argue that because they filed their asylum application before April 1, 1997, they had settled expectations of being placed in deportation proceedings rather than removal proceedings. Mr. Carrillo-Maldonado also challenges the denial of voluntary departure (which was based on *187 the IJ’s and BIA’s finding of dishonest testimony). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b). We deny the petition.
This case is not distinguishable from Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594 (9th Cir.2002). Settled expectations that an INS action will commence upon the denial of an asylum application do not equate to settled expectations as to when it will commence. The BIA correctly held that the INS action commenced upon the filing of…