Case ID: f-appx_396/html/0376-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gloria HERNANDEZ MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-71010.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
    
    Filed Sept. 21, 2010.
    Gloria Hernandez Martinez, Los Ange-les, CA, pro se.
    
      Joubin Nasseri, Nasseri Law Group, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
    Richard M. Evans, Esquire, Assistant Director, Anthony John Messuri, Esquire, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gloria Hernandez Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming the immigration judge’s denial of her application for cancellation of removal based on her failure to establish the requisite hardship to her qualifying relatives.

Hernandez Martinez contends that the agency erred in finding that her qualifying relatives will not suffer hardship if she is removed. We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that petitioner failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.