Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630858
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Hermida v. Gonzales
No. 8630858 · Decided April 30, 2007
No. 8630858·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. 8630858
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Marcos Uscanga Hermida seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Uscanga 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). Uscanga’s contention that the BIA failed to evaluate all the hardship equities is not supported by the record and does not amount to a colorable due process 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 ** Marcos Uscanga Hermida seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Marcos Uscanga Hermida seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
02We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Uscanga failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative.
03Uscanga’s contention that the BIA failed to evaluate all the hardship equities is not supported by the record and does not amount to a colorable due process 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 ** Marcos Uscanga Hermida seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Hermida v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 30, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630858 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.