Penaloza

Penaloza v. Gonzales

Good Law
235 F. App'x 486
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 26, 2007No. 05-73167California404 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*487 MEMORANDUM **

Antonio Vallejo Penaloza and his wife, Adela Veldanez Ortuno, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the summary affirmance by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) of the denial by an immigration judge (IJ) of their applications for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we dismiss in part and grant in part the petition for review.

Penaloza argues that the IJ erred in finding that he failed to establish that his United States citizen children would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if he were removed to Mexico. We lack jurisdiction 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). We therefore dismiss the petition for review in regard to Penaloza.

Ortuno argues that the IJ erred in concluding that she failed to satisfy the ten-year continuous physical presence requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A) due to her departure to Mexico in 1998. She testified before the IJ that when she attempted to return to the United States four weeks later, she was detained at the border for a day and then returned to…

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.