Case ID: f-appx_205/html/0574-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alejandro Olea ORTIZ; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-70380.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 6, 2006.
    
    Filed Nov. 9, 2006.
    Alejandro Olea Ortiz, Garden Grove, CA, pro se.
    Mariam G. Bailón Martinez, Garden Grove, CA, pro se.
    CAC-District Counsel, Esq., 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, Michelle G. Latour, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., John E. Cunningham, II, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division/Fraud Section, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: LEAVY, GOULD, 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

Alejandro Olea-Ortiz and Mariam Bail-on-Martinez, natives and citizens of Mexico and husband and wife, petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming the immigration judge’s denial of their application for cancellation of removal.

We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ challenge to the agency’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their qualifying relatives. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003); Montero-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 277 F.3d 1137, 1144 (9th Cir.2002).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.