Ruiz-Pena

Ruiz-Pena v. Keisler

Good Law
243 F. App'x 341
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 27, 2007Nos. 05-71280, 05-73931California396 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

In these consolidated petitions, Juan David Ruiz-Pena and his wife Sonia Maribel Elizondo-Ruelas, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board *342 of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their applications for cancellation of removal and its order denying their motion to reopen. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings. See Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). In No. 05-71280, we deny in part, dismiss in part, grant in part, and remand. In No. 05-73931, we deny the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003).

In No. 05-71280, the record shows that the IJ used the correct “exceptional and extremely unusual” hardship standard and not an…

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.