Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8641673
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Hernandez-Mendoza v. Gonzales
No. 8641673 · Decided June 15, 2007
No. 8641673·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 15, 2007
Citation
No. 8641673
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Rolando Hernandez-Mendoza seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. *660 We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that an applicant has failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative, see Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003), and Hernandez-Mendoza does not raise 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”). We do not consider Hernandez-Mendoza’s contention regarding the other elements of statutory eligibility because Hernandez-Mendoza’s failure to establish hardship is dispositive. 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 ** Rolando Hernandez-Mendoza seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Rolando Hernandez-Mendoza seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
02*660 We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that an applicant has failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative, see Romero-Torres v.
03Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003), and Hernandez-Mendoza does not raise a colorable due process claim, see Martinez-Rosas v.
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 ** Rolando Hernandez-Mendoza seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying his application for cancellation of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Hernandez-Mendoza v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 15, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8641673 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.