Court Opinion

ID: 8601893
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 23:12:06.627398+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:11.732423
License: Public Domain

ORDER
PER CURIAM.
We have reviewed the response to the court’s February 6, 2006 order to show cause, and we conclude that petitioner has faded to raise a colorable constitutional claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.2003); Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). Accordingly, respondent’s motion to dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction is granted. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003); Montero-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 277 F.3d 1137, 1144 (9th Cir.2002).
All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.
DISMISSED.