Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630884
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Arzate v. Gonzales
No. 8630884 · Decided April 30, 2007
No. 8630884·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 30, 2007
Citation
No. 8630884
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Alfonzo Urzua Arzate seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Urzua Arzate failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). Urzua Arzate’s contention that the BIA violated his due process rights by disregarding evidence of hardship and by making an implicit credibility determination does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) (“traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.”). PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Alfonzo Urzua Arzate seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Alfonzo Urzua Arzate seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal.
02We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Urzua Arzate failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative.
03Urzua Arzate’s contention that the BIA violated his due process rights by disregarding evidence of hardship and by making an implicit credibility determination does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim.
04Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) (“traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.”).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Alfonzo Urzua Arzate seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Arzate v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 30, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630884 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.