Ramirez-Rodriguez v. Mukasey
This text of 302 F. App'x 617 (Ramirez-Rodriguez v. Mukasey) 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
Felix Ramirez-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that Ramirez-Rodriguez failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his qualifying relatives. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005). Ramirez-Rodriguez’s contention that the IJ and BIA misapplied the law to the facts of his case and failed to adequately consider and weigh all the evidence of hardship does not raise a colorable due process claim. Id. (“traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th 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
302 F. App'x 617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramirez-rodriguez-v-mukasey-ca9-2008.