Case Name: Paula Rosales ROSALES, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-08
Citations: 210 F. App'x 608
Docket Number: No. 05-75642
Parties: Paula Rosales ROSALES, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 210
Pages: 608–609

Head Matter:
Paula Rosales ROSALES, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-75642.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 4, 2006 .
Filed Dec. 8, 2006.
Paula Rosales Rosales, Las Vegas, CA, pro se.
Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Las Vegas, NV, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kurt B. Larson, Esq., Stacy S. Paddack, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Paula Rosales Rosales, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision affirming an immigration judge's denial of her application for cancellation of removal. Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Rosales Rosales' challenge to the agency's discretionary determination that she failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her qualifying relatives. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir.2005). Moreover, Rosales Rosales has failed to raise a colorable constitutional or legal claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001); Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
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.