Martin Rojas-Refujio v. Loretta E. Lynch

670 F. App'x 521

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Martin Rojas-Refujio, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 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 deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Rojas-Refujio failed to establish the requisite continuous physical presence, where Rojas-Refujio testified that he remained outside the United States for a period of more than 180 days in the aggregate during the statutory period. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(2) (a departure in excess of 180 days in the aggregate breaks continuous physical presence).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.