Case ID: f-appx_92/html/0556-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lucia Gisela Zarazua De ROJAS; Benito Rojas-Galvan; Hector Gareth Rojas Zarazua; Sharito Gisela Rojas Zarazua; Lizet Briseiry Rojas Zarazua; Josue Benito Rojas Zarazua, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-71861.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 15, 2004.
    
    Decided March 30, 2004.
    
      Walter Rafael Pineda, Esq., Law Offices of Walter Rafael Pineda, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wernery, Esq., Margaret Perry, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., 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

Lucia Gisela Zarazua de Rojas, her husband, Benito Rojas-Galvan, and their four children, Hector Gareth Rojas Zarazua, Sharito Gisela Rojas Zarazua, Lizet Briseiry Rojas Zarazua, and Josué Benito Rojas Zarazua (“Petitioners”), natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s denial of their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

Petitioners’ contention that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate their right to due process is 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.