Case ID: f-appx_155/html/0285-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jose De Jesus Ramirez ACOSTA; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 04-74382.
    Agency Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 8, 2005.
    
    Decided Nov. 21, 2005.
    Frank P. Sprouls, Law Office of Ricci and Sprouls, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before WALLACE, LEAVY and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose de Jesus Ramirez Acosta, a native and citizen of Mexico, and his wife, Maria Magdalena Bueno de Ramirez, also a native and citizen of Mexico, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“LJ”) denial of their applications for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider the petitioners’ sole contention that the BIA’s statutory interpretation of section 240A of the Immigration and Nationalization Act violates Congressional intent because this issue was never raised before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (no jurisdiction over legal claims not presented to the BIA).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.