Castillo v. Barr, 041520 FED9, 18-70591
|Party Name:||FRANCISCO JUAREZ CASTILLO, AKA Francisco Juarez, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.|
|Judge Panel:||Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||April 15, 2020|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted April 7, 2020 [**]
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A205-721-799
Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Francisco Juarez Castillo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to remand and review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency's discretionary determination that Juarez Castillo did not show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his U.S. citizen wife, where his contention that the BIA did not consider relevant factors is not supported and he otherwise has not presented a colorable legal or constitutional claim. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (no jurisdiction to consider agency's hardship determination absent a colorable legal or constitutional claim); Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009) (no jurisdiction to consider whether agency's hardship determination was consistent with its prior decisions).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in declining to remand or...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP