Jose Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. Jefferson Sessions
This text of 708 F. App'x 356 (Jose Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. Jefferson Sessions) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jose Rodriguez-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
Rodriguez-Rodriguez has waived any challenge to the agency’s hardship determination. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (issues not, raised in an opening brief are waived).
Because the agency’s hardship determination is dispositive, we do not reach Rodriguez-Rodriguez’s contentions regarding the agency’s continuous physical presence and related credibility determinations. See Camacho-Cruz v. Holder, 621 F.3d 941, 942 (9th Cir. 2010) (failure to satisfy any one of the four requirements in 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1) is fatal to a cancellation application); Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach),
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
708 F. App'x 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-rodriguez-rodriguez-v-jefferson-sessions-ca9-2017.