Rosales

Rosales v. Gonzales

Good Law
171 F. App'x 608
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 2006No. 04-72721California213 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rigoberto Rosales and Ana Rosales, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s denial of their applications for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 .

Although we lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination regarding “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship,” Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003), we nonetheless retain jurisdiction to determine whether the IJ’s interpretation of the hardship standard violates due process, Ramirez-Perez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 1001, 1004 (9th Cir.2003). Reviewing de novo, we conclude that the IJ’s interpretation of the hardship standard falls within the broad range authorized by the statute. See id. at 1006 .

We further conclude that the IJ did not violate due process in voicing skepticism regarding the testimony of petitioners’ medical expert because the IJ ultimately considered the evidence and concluded that petitioners failed to establish eligibility for relief. See Sanchez-Cruz v. INS, 255 F.3d 775, 779 (9th Cir.2001) (requiring prejudice to establish a due process…

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.