Case Name: Laura FLORES-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-22
Citations: 319 F. App'x 496
Docket Number: No. 06-73565
Parties: Laura FLORES-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, BYBEE, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 319
Pages: 496–496

Head Matter:
Laura FLORES-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-73565.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 13, 2009.
Filed Jan. 22, 2009.
William J. Baker, Moreno & Associates, Chula Vista, CA, for Petitioner.
Robert N. Markle, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, BYBEE, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Laura Flores-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review questions of law de novo. Altamirano v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 586, 591 (9th Cir.2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA correctly affirmed the IJ's removal order based on its prior determination that Flores-Hernandez was ineligible for cancellation of removal. See Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1175 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc) (BIA need not remand to the IJ for issuance of a removal order where a determination of removability was already made by the IJ).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.