Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8642863
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Lopez v. Gonzales
No. 8642863 · Decided June 27, 2007
No. 8642863·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 27, 2007
Citation
No. 8642863
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Ines Bello Lopez and Ana Carys Palacios Bello seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. 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 petitioners do not raise a colorable due pro *263 cess 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 ** Ines Bello Lopez and Ana Carys Palacios Bello seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their application for cancellation of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Ines Bello Lopez and Ana Carys Palacios Bello seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their application for cancellation of removal.
02We 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 petitioners do not raise a colorable due pro *263 cess 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 ** Ines Bello Lopez and Ana Carys Palacios Bello seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their application for cancellation of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Lopez v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 27, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8642863 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.