Ramirez
Ramirez v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Esther Ramirez de Ayala (“Ramirez”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l).
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 as amended by the REAL ID Act, which applies retroactively to this case. REAL ID Act of 2005 § 106(a), Pub.L. No. 109-13, Div. B, 119 Stat. 231 (2005); see Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 410 F.3d 585, 587 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition.
1. Physical Presence
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Ramirez cannot demonstrate the requisite ten years of con *554 tinuous physical presence and is thereby statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal under § 1229b(b)(l).
To overcome ineligibility, Ramirez argues that application of the ten year physical presence requirement to aliens who, like her, departed the United States involuntarily in an effort to flee domestic violence, violates the Equal Protection Clause because federal immigration law should “treat a party like Petitioner ... very differently from a party who leaves for light and trivial reasons.” To…