Case Name: Ana Perez DE VILLANUEVA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-11-05
Citations: 300 F. App'x 477
Docket Number: No. 07-72315
Parties: Ana Perez DE VILLANUEVA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 300
Pages: 477–478

Head Matter:
Ana Perez DE VILLANUEVA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-72315.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 28, 2008.
Filed Nov. 5, 2008.
Ana Perez De Villanueva, Santa Ana, CA, pro se.
Oluremi Olatokunbo Adalemo, Esquire, Linda S. Wendtland, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Le Fevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: HAWKINS, RAWLINSON, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ana Perez De Villanueva, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of her motion to reopen the BIA's underlying denial of her application for cancellation of removal based on petitioner's failure to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her qualifying relatives.
The evidence that petitioner presented with her motion to reopen concerned the same basic hardship grounds as her application for cancellation of removal. We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA's discretionary determination that the evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of hardship. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601-03 (9th Cir .2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.