Case Name: Fernando Gonzalez MALDONADO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-10
Citations: 175 F. App'x 111
Docket Number: No. 05-76489
Parties: Fernando Gonzalez MALDONADO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, T.G. NELSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 175
Pages: 111–112

Head Matter:
Fernando Gonzalez MALDONADO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-76489.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 6, 2006.
Filed March 10, 2006.
Molly C. Curtis, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.
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, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: BEEZER, T.G. NELSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Respondent's motion to dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction with respect to petitioners Fernando Gonzalez-Maldonado and Ana Bertha Gonzalez is granted. 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).
Petitioner Yatziri Gonzalez Quinonez does not have a qualifying relative for purposes of cancellation of removal. Accordingly, the court summarily denies the petition with respect to this petitioner. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D); Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2002).
All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.
DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.
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.