Case ID: f-appx_90/html/0982-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eduardo CRUZ, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-72420.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 15, 2004.
    
    Decided March 23, 2004.
    Walter Rafael Pineda, Esq., Law Offices of Walter Rafael Pineda, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Lagu-na Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Regina Byrd, Attorney, M. Jocelyn Wright, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before B. FLETCHER, WARDLAW and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Eduardo Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming, without opinion, an immigration judge’s denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal.

Cruz’s contentions that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate his right to due process are foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849-51 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that the BIA’s streamlining procedure does not violate an alien’s due process rights).

The Clerk is directed to stay the mandate pending the resolution of Desta v. Ashcroft, No. 03-70477, and further order of this Court.

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.