Case Name: Dora Alicia Guerrero MORA; Maximo Mora Reyes, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-07-14
Citations: 68 F. App'x 864
Docket Number: No. 02-70291; INS A75-656-491, A75-656-492
Parties: Dora Alicia Guerrero MORA; Maximo Mora Reyes, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 68
Pages: 864–864

Head Matter:
Dora Alicia Guerrero MORA; Maximo Mora Reyes, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-70291.
INS [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 8, 2003.
Decided July 14, 2003.
Before KOZINSKI, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)®, we do not have jurisdiction to review the BIA's denial of applications for cancellation of removal unless the petitioner asserts a colorable constitutional claim. Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1270-71 (9th Cir.2001). We have repeatedly warned that "a petitioner may not create the jurisdiction that Congress chose to remove simply by cloaking an abuse of discretion argument in constitutional garb." Id. at 1271. Because the Moras' due process claim does just that, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
PETITION 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.