Cornejo

Cornejo v. Mukasey

Good Law
272 F. App'x 596
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 27, 2008No. 05-71457California221 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Reyes Cornejo and Hortensia Reyes, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denial of their application for cancellation of removal.

Petitioners allege that the agency erred in finding that Hortensia Reyes failed to establish the requisite amount of continuous residence in the United States. The BIA, however, did not address the continuous residence issue, and instead based its decision solely on the basis that petitioners failed to establish exceptional or extremely unusual hardship to petitioners’ qualifying relative. This court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to demonstrate the requisite hardship. See Martinez-Ro *597 sas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).

The IJ granted voluntary departure for a 60-day period, and the BIA streamlined and changed the voluntary departure period to 30 days. However, in Padilla-Padilla v. Gonzales, 463 F.3d 972, 981 (9th Cir.2006), we held that “because the BIA issued a streamlined order, it was required to affirm the entirety of the IJ’s decision, including the length of the voluntary…

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.