Ramirez-Rosas v. Gonzales

188 F. App'x 587
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 3, 2006·No. No. 06-70507·Published

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the response to the court’s February 9, 2006 order to show cause, and we conclude that petitioners have failed to raise a colorable constitutional claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). Accordingly, we sua sponte dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003); Montero-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 277 F.3d 1137, 1144 (9th Cir.2002).

All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ramirez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 188 F. App'x 587 (9th Cir. 2006).

188 F. App'x 587 (Ramirez-Rosas v. Gonzales) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related