Gutierrez-Romo

Gutierrez-Romo v. Mukasey

Good Law
285 F. App'x 489
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 21, 2008Nos. 04-73946, 04-76486California554 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Adán Gutierrez-Romo petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of his cancellation of removal application; his motion to reopen; and for review of a related decision of the Legalization Appeals Unit (LAU) determining that his Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) appeal was untimely.

Gutierrez-Romo’s application for cancellation of removal was denied because he failed to establish the requisite “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” upon his removal. We lack jurisdiction to review this discretionary determination. Chuyon Yon Hong v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 1030, 1034 (9th Cir.2008).

We retain jurisdiction to consider color-able due process claims arising in connection with a discretionary hardship determination. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 596 (9th Cir.2006). However, contrary to Gutierrez-Romo’s assertion, the Immigration Judge (IJ) did not improperly focus on the fact that GutierrezRomo’s wife had filed a petition on his behalf. Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the petition for lack of jurisdiction. See Martinez-Ro s as v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) (“[Traditional abuse of…

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.