Case Name: Conrado Adolfo SINTUJ-VASQUEZ; Lilian Del Carmen Catalan, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-28
Citations: 194 F. App'x 433
Docket Number: No. 05-71152
Parties: Conrado Adolfo SINTUJ-VASQUEZ; Lilian Del Carmen Catalan, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 194
Pages: 433–434

Head Matter:
Conrado Adolfo SINTUJ-VASQUEZ; Lilian Del Carmen Catalan, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-71152.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2006.
Decided July 28, 2006.
Charles E. Nichol, Esq., Law Office of Charles E. Nichol, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Joan E. Smiley, Esq., Richard M. Evans, Esq., Kristin A. Cabral, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Conrado Adolfo Sintuj-Vasquez and Lilian Del Carmen Catalan, husband and wife, and natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.
The petitioners' contention that the agency deprived them of due process by finding that they failed to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship does not state a colorable due process claim. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) ("[traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.").
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.