Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0521-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Martin ROJAS-REFUJIO, aka Martin Refugio, aka Martin Rojas, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 14-73034
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted October 25, 2016 
    
    Filed November 03, 2016
    Martin Rojas-Refujio, Pro Se, Fullerton, CA, for Petitioner.
    Jessica Dawgert, Trial Attorney, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, San Francisco, CA, Respondent.
    Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Martin Rojas-Refujio, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination. Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Rojas-Refujio failed to establish the requisite continuous physical presence, where Rojas-Refujio testified that he remained outside the United States for a period of more than 180 days in the aggregate during the statutory period. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(2) (a departure in excess of 180 days in the aggregate breaks continuous physical presence).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.