Washington v. Gonzales

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Washington, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration judge’s decision finding Washington removable. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a). When, as here, the BIA affirms the immigration judge’s decision without opinion, the immigration judge’s decision consti *54 tutes the final agency determination, subject to this court’s review. Halaim v. INS, 358 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.2004). We review the immigration judge’s findings for substantial evidence. Id.

Having carefully considered Washington’s petition for review, we deny it.

Washington contends his removal proceedings should have been terminated because he attained conditional permanent resident status in 1992, but the government thereafter improperly terminated that status. Although the record evidence, including an 1-551 approval stamp in Washington’s passport, indeed suggests he had made substantial progress toward successful completion of his permanent resident application, we conclude there is substantial evidence in the record to support the immigration judge’s factual determination that the application process…