Miguel Rodriguez-Martinez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
This text of 498 F. App'x 713 (Miguel Rodriguez-Martinez v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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 **
Miguel Rodriguez-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part, and dismiss in part, the petition for review.
Rodriguez-Martinez contends that he has a qualifying relative for purposes of cancellation of removal because he is the “de facto” parent of his United States citizen grandchildren. As Rodriguez-Martinez acknowledges, however, this court has rejected his claim, see Moreno-Morante v. Gonzales, 490 F.3d 1172, 1176-78 (9th Cir.2007), and we are not at liberty to overturn the decision of a prior panel, see United States v. Easterday, 564 F.3d 1004, 1010-11 (9th Cir.2009) (a decision by a panel of this court is binding unless it is overruled by the court en bane or by the U.S. Supreme Court).
Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of petitioner’s request for voluntary departure. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(f); Kalilu v. Mukasey, 548 F.3d 1215, 1217 n. 1 (9th Cir.2008) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED IN PART.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
498 F. App'x 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miguel-rodriguez-martinez-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2012.