U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2007

Arzate v. Gonzales

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 30, 2007 · Bea, Clifton, Graber

230 F. App'x 752

Counsel

Alfonzo Urzua Arzate, Ontario, CA, pro se., District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Daniel G. Lonergan, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Alfonzo Urzua Arzate seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Urzua Arzate failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir. 2003).

Urzua Arzate’s contention that the BIA violated his due process rights by disregarding evidence of hardship and by making an implicit credibility determination does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005) (“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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.