Ruvalcaba-Esqueda v. Ashcroft
This text of 114 F. App'x 825 (Ruvalcaba-Esqueda v. Ashcroft) 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
Ricardo Ruvalcaba-Esqueda, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for suspension of deportation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We deny the petition for review.
Ruvalcaba-Esqueda’s contentions challenging the BIA’s streamlining procedure are foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 852 (9th Cir.2003).
Pursuant to Elian v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 897, 898-99 (9th Cir.2004) (order), Ruvalcaba-Esqueda’s voluntary departure period will begin to run upon issuance of this court’s mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit 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
114 F. App'x 825, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruvalcaba-esqueda-v-ashcroft-ca9-2004.