Aguila Cueva v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Oscar Saul Aguila Cueva and Ofelia Gal-lardo Ramirez, spouses and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo questions of law and constitutional claims. Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir.2003). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that Aguila Cueva failed to show the requisite hardship to a qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).
The agency correctly concluded that Gallardo Ramirez was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal because she failed to demonstrate the requisite ten years of continuous physical presence. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(2).
Petitioners’ contention that the agency violated equal protection by not allowing Gallardo Ramirez to apply for suspension of deportation is unavailing. Gallardo Ramirez was served with a…