Court Opinion

ID: 8601913
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 23:12:53.017105+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:11.742552
License: Public Domain

ORDER
We have reviewed respondent’s motion to dismiss and petitioners’ opposition to the motion to dismiss. We conclude that petitioners have failed to raise a colorable constitutional claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001); Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005). 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)®; 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 and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), remains in effect until issuance of the mandate.
DISMISSED.