Case Name: Oscar Eduardo Medina CERVANTES; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-17
Citations: 177 F. App'x 603
Docket Number: No. 04-72054
Parties: Oscar Eduardo Medina CERVANTES; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, MCKEOWN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 603–604

Head Matter:
Oscar Eduardo Medina CERVANTES; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-72054.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2006.
Decided April 17, 2006.
Oscar Eduardo Medina Cervantes, Lynwood, CA, pro se.
Blanca Rosa Zamarripa De Medina, Lynwood, CA, pro se.
Monica Faviola Mendina Zamarripa, Lynwood, CA, pro se.
Paloma Guadalupe Mendina Zamarripa, Lynwood, CA, pro se.
Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Genevieve Holm, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: SILVERMAN, MCKEOWN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Oscar Eduardo Medina Cervantes, his wife Blanca Roas Zamarripa de Medina, and their two minor daughters, natives and citizens of Mexico petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming without separate opinion the immigration judge's denial of their application for cancellation of removal.
The only issue that petitioners raise in their opening brief is that the immigration judge erred in concluding that Blanca Zamarripa failed to establish that her removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her United States citizen son.
We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that Blanca Zamarripa failed to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir.2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED, as to Blanca Zamarripa, PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED, as to the remaining petitioners.
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.