Case ID: f-appx_421/html/0682-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lucia MAGANA-MAGANA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    Nos. 09-70348.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.
    
    Filed March 10, 2011.
    Gloria A. Goldman, Gloria A. Goldman, PC, Tucson, AZ, for Petitioner.
    Christopher C. Fuller, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. 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

Lucia Magana-Magana, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that Ma-gana-Magana failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir.2005). Magana-Magana’s contention that the BIA applied an incorrect hardship standard is not supported by the record and does not amount to a colorable legal or constitutional claim over which we have jurisdiction. See Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 979-80 (9th Cir.2009).

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