Castillo

Castillo v. Gonzales

Good Law
202 F. App'x 254
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 25, 2006No. 06-72462California281 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

We have reviewed the opposition to the motion to dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, and we conclude that petitioners have failed to raise a color-able legal or constitutional claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001); Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.2003). Respondent’s motion to dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction is granted with respect to petitioners Jose Gorgonio Flores Castillo and Juana Garate Reyes. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2) (B) (i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003).

We conclude that summary disposition is appropriate with respect to petitioners Victor Manuel Flores Garate and Julio Cesar Flores Garate because the questions raised by this petition for review with respect to them are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). The agency granted petitioners Victor Manuel Flores Garate and Julio Cesar Flores Ga-rate the only relief they requested, voluntary departure. Accordingly, this…

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.