Luna
Luna v. Mukasey
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Raul Luna and Alicia Correa Luna, married natives and citizens of Mexico, and their Mexican children, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision de *488 nying the Lunas’ applications for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination. Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir.2004). We grant the petition for review.
The agency’s determination that Raul and Alicia Luna were not “sufficiently” credible and therefore failed to meet their burden of proof was not supported by specific, cogent reasons bearing a legitimate nexus to the determination. See Vera-Villegas v. INS, 330 F.3d 1222, 1230 (9th Cir.2003). The IJ determined that Raul Luna entered the United States in 1984 and credited his testimony that he never departed the country for more than 90 days. The IJ concluded, however, that Raul Luna’s testimony about departures from the United States in addition to those listed in his application made it impossible to ascertain whether he…