Equihua-Equihua

MEMORANDUM **

Jesus and Maria de Lourdes Equihua-Equihua petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order denying cancellation of removal. For this court to have jurisdiction over such a discretionary decision, the asserted due process violation must be colorable, that is, *319 “the claim must have some possible validity.” Tor res-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).

1. Petitioners’ contention that the BIA’s four-year delay in publishing In re Monreal, 23 I & N Dec. 56 (BIA 2001, 2001 WL 534295 ), violated due process is not a colorable claim, as sufficient guidance existed on the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” standard. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D) (requiring “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to United States citizen relative for cancellation of removal); see also Matter of Pena-Diaz, 20 I & N Dec. 841, 845 (BIA 1994) (holding that prima facie showing of “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” was established where United States citizen child was undergoing treatment for congenital heart defect). The Monreal decision…