Salas-Alamilla

Salas-Alamilla v. Gonzales

Good Law
186 F. App'x 790
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 2006No. 04-70116California417 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Carlos Salas-Alamilla and Martha Osoria-de Salas, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We deny in part, dismiss in part, and grant in part the petition for review.

The petitioners contend that the Board’s summary decision deprived them of due process. This contention is foreclosed by Falcon Carache v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 848-53 (9th Cir.2003).

Osoria-de Salas also argues that the immigration judge erred in finding that she failed to establish that her United States citizen children would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if she were removed to Mexico. We lack juris *791 diction to review this discretionary determination. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B)(i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 891 (9th Cir.2003).

Salas-Alamilla contends that the immigration judge erred in finding that he failed to satisfy the continuous physical presence requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A) due to his departure to Mexico in 1993. He testified that…

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.