Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8627817
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Astorga Salazar v. Gonzales
No. 8627817 · Decided January 12, 2007
No. 8627817·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
January 12, 2007
Citation
No. 8627817
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Astorga Salazar and Maria Astorga, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ orders adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to establish the requisite exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their United States citizen children. 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B)(i); Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926 (9th Cir.2005). Petitioners’ contention that the Board erred in failing to take into consideration all of the factors bearing on exceptional and extremely unusual hardship is not a colorable constitutional claim that overcomes the jurisdictional bar to our review of the discretionary hardship decision. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). 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 ** Ramon Astorga Salazar and Maria Astorga, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ orders adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s decision denyin
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Astorga Salazar and Maria Astorga, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ orders adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s decision denyin
02We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to establish the requisite exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to their United States citizen children.
03Petitioners’ contention that the Board erred in failing to take into consideration all of the factors bearing on exceptional and extremely unusual hardship is not a colorable constitutional claim that overcomes the jurisdictional bar to our
04This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Ramon Astorga Salazar and Maria Astorga, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ orders adopting and affirming an immigration judge’s decision denyin
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Astorga Salazar v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on January 12, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8627817 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.