Case Name: Francisco ZELAYA-GAYTAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-11-16
Citations: 155 F. App'x 268
Docket Number: No. 04-74583
Parties: Francisco ZELAYA-GAYTAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, LEAVY and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 155
Pages: 268–269

Head Matter:
Francisco ZELAYA-GAYTAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-74583.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 8, 2005.
Decided Nov. 16, 2005.
Robert F. Jacobs, Esq., Law Offices of Robert F. Jacobs, PLC., Downey, CA, for Petitioner.
District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wendtland, Esq., John S. Hogan, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Francisco Zelaya-Gaytan, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("IJ") order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.
Zelaya-Gaytan's sole contention in his brief to this court is that his case should be remanded because he is eligible for adjustment of status. This contention is unavailing because the proper recourse is to file a motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1).
The voluntary departure period was stayed, and that stay will expire upon issuance of the mandate. See Desta v. Ashcroft 365 F.3d 741, 750 (9th Cir.2004).
Zelaya-Gaytan's motion to hold the case in abeyance is denied.
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.