Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630546
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Tafoya v. Gonzales
No. 8630546 · Decided April 23, 2007
No. 8630546·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 23, 2007
Citation
No. 8630546
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Jose Antonio Luviano Tafoya and Maria Ruth Luviano Vasquez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their applications 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, 892 (9th Cir.2003), and petitioners do 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 Luviano Tafoya’s contentions regarding the lack of good moral character finding, because his 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 ** Jose Antonio Luviano Tafoya and Maria Ruth Luviano Vasquez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their applications for cancellation of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Jose Antonio Luviano Tafoya and Maria Ruth Luviano Vasquez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their applications 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, 892 (9th Cir.2003), and petitioners do 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 ** Jose Antonio Luviano Tafoya and Maria Ruth Luviano Vasquez seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their applications for cancellation of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Tafoya v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 23, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630546 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.