Roldan-Gallegos

Roldan-Gallegos v. Mukasey

Good Law
261 F. App'x 963
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 2007No. 05-73789California370 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Lead petitioner Antonio Roldan-Gallegos and his wife and three children, all *964 natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order adopting and affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying Petitioners’ applications for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo claims of due-process violations. Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Petitioners contend that the IJ violated due process by ignoring evidence relevant. to their applications for cancellation of removal, and failing to investigate adequately those applications. Contrary to Petitioners’ contentions, the proceedings were not “ ‘so fundamentally unfair that [they were] prevented from reasonably presenting [their] case.’” Id. (citation omitted). Moreover, Petitioners have failed to specify what evidence was ignored or not developed, and have not explained how the evidence would have affected the outcome…

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.