Case ID: f-appx_97/html/0191-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Miguel Angel BAHENA; Maria Cruz Bahena, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-73486.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 10, 2004.
    
    Decided May 18, 2004.
    
      J. Jack Artz, Esq., South Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, CAC — District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Papú Sandhu, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Miguel Angel Bahena and his wife, Maria Cruz Bahena, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction over petitioners’ sole contention that the IJ erred by concluding that their removal would not cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their United States citizen daughter. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003).

We deny petitioners’ request to remand their case to the IJ to be held in abeyance pending resolution of their son’s application for adjustment of status without prejudice to any motion to reopen regarding this issue that may be pending before the BIA.

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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.