Case Name: Leopoldo BAJALA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-07
Citations: 355 F. App'x 986
Docket Number: No. 06-71049
Parties: Leopoldo BAJALA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 355
Pages: 986–987

Head Matter:
Leopoldo BAJALA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-71049.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
Filed Dec. 7, 2009.
Frank P. Sprouls, Esquire, Law Office of Ricci and Sprouls, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Gregory Michael Kelch, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Leopoldo Bajala, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's removal order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Altamirano v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 586, 591 (9th Cir.2005), and we deny the petition for review.
Bajala's contention that his conviction under California Health & Safety Code § 11358 is not an aggravated felony is foreclosed by United States v. Reveles-Espinoza, 522 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th Cir.2008) (per curiam). Accordingly, the agency properly concluded that Bajala was not eligible for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.