Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8623616
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Aldana v. Gonzales
No. 8623616 · Decided July 28, 2006
No. 8623616·Ninth Circuit · 2006·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
July 28, 2006
Citation
No. 8623616
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Carmen Aldana, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen and reconsider the Board’s earlier decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . In her motion to reopen and reconsider, Aldana contended that the agency erred in failing to consider her hardship factors in assessing her eligibility for cancellation of removal. However, the agency did not address hardship because Aldana indisputably could not meet the physical presence requirement. Accordingly, the Board did not abuse discretion in denying Aldana’s motion. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l) (stating the requirements of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship, good moral character and ten years of continuous physical presence in order to qualify for cancellation relief). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 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.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Carmen Aldana, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen and reconsider the Board’s earlier decision affirming an immigration judg
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Carmen Aldana, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen and reconsider the Board’s earlier decision affirming an immigration judg
02In her motion to reopen and reconsider, Aldana contended that the agency erred in failing to consider her hardship factors in assessing her eligibility for cancellation of removal.
03However, the agency did not address hardship because Aldana indisputably could not meet the physical presence requirement.
04Accordingly, the Board did not abuse discretion in denying Aldana’s motion.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Carmen Aldana, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her motion to reopen and reconsider the Board’s earlier decision affirming an immigration judg
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Aldana v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on July 28, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8623616 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.