Flores

Flores v. Ashcroft

Good Law
104 F. App'x 126
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 28, 2004Nos. 02-71262, 02-74172California363 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Zeferino Araiza Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal, and the BIA’s order denying Flores’s motion to reopen. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and de novo due process violations, Har-tooni v. INS, 21 F.3d 336, 339 (9th Cir. 1994). We dismiss in part, grant in part, and deny in part.

To the extent Flores appeals the denial of cancellation of removal, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Flores did not qualify because he failed to demonstrate “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to a qualifying relative. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B)®; see Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890-91 (9th Cir. 2003).

Contrary to Flores’s contention, the BIA’s failure to articulate reasons for its decision does not violate due process. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 850-51 (9th Cir.2003).

The BIA denied Flores’s motion to reopen because he had…

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.