Case Name: Jorge MARQUEZ-CRUZ; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-25
Citations: 107 F. App'x 163
Docket Number: No. 02-71771; Agency Nos. A73-809-697, A73-809-698
Parties: Jorge MARQUEZ-CRUZ; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before B. FLETCHER, LEAVY and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 107
Pages: 163–164

Head Matter:
Jorge MARQUEZ-CRUZ; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-71771.
Agency Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Aug. 25, 2004.
Before B. FLETCHER, LEAVY and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
Judges B. Fletcher and Wardlaw have voted to amend the memorandum disposition and to deny the petition for panel rehearing. Judge Leavy has voted the deny the petition for panel rehearing.
The memorandum disposition filed on March 31, 2004 is amended as follows:
Following the paragraph reading, "Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, we have jurisdiction to review petitioners' constitutional challenge to the BIA's streamlining regulations .," insert the following paragraph:
"We also have jurisdiction to determine whether the IJ's interpretation of the hardship standard violates due process in light of subsequent BIA decisions defining the standard. See Ramirez-Perez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 1001, 1004 (9th Cir.2003). Reviewing de novo, we conclude that the IJ's interpretation of the hardship standard falls within the broad range authorized by the statute. See id. at 1006."
Except for the above amendments, Petitioners' petition for panel rehearing is denied.
No further petition for rehearing will be entertained.