Case Name: Jose Antonio Leon MUNOZ, Petitioner v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-27
Citations: 272 F. App'x 568
Docket Number: No. 06-74174
Parties: Jose Antonio Leon MUNOZ, Petitioner v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 272
Pages: 568–568

Head Matter:
Jose Antonio Leon MUNOZ, Petitioner v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-74174.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 18, 2008.
Filed March 27, 2008.
Christopher J. Todd, Mill Valley, CA, for Petitioner.
James A. Hurley, Anh-Thu P. Mai, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel,
Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, T.G. NELSON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jose Antonio Leon Munoz petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge's denial of petitioner's application for cancellation of removal.
We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioner's challenge to the IJ's extreme hardship determination because it is a nonreviewable discretionary determination. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)). Petitioner's contentions that the agency violated his due process and equal protection rights by failing to consider properly the proffered evidence do not amount to colorable constitutional claims. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.