Case ID: f-appx_84/html/0795-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Margarito SANCHEZ-ARROYO; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-72092.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Dec. 12, 2003.
    Walter Rafael Pineda, Esq., Law Offices of Walter Rafael Pineda, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
    Regional Counsel, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Esq., Susan Houser, Esq., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and MCKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Margarito Sanehez-Arroyo, his wife Maria Sanchez, and their two sons, all natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(a)(7), without opinion, an immigration judge’s removal order and denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and cancellation of removal. Petitioners contend that the BIA’s decision “without opinion” does not comport with due process, which requires the BIA to provide an explanation as to what was “heard, considered, and decided” in reaching its decision. This contention is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that the BIA does not violate due process by affirming pursuant to its streamlining regulations an immigration judge’s decision without issuing an opinion).

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.