Case ID: f-appx_302/html/0622-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Meliton Cervantes SALAZAR, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-71248.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 24, 2008.
    
    Filed Dec. 2, 2008.
    Meliton Cervantes Salazar, Pomona, CA, for Petitioner.
    CAC-District, 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, Jeffrey L. Menkin, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Washington, D.C., Respondent.
    Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Meliton Cervantes Salazar, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.

We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that Salazar failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his qualifying relatives. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005). Salazar’s contention that the BIA failed to adequately consider and weigh all the evidence of hardship does not raise a color-able due process claim. Id. (“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.