Thao Minh Truong v. Gonzales

*722 MEMORANDUM ** Substantial evidence supports the Immigration Judge’s finding that Truong is entitled neither to withholding of removal nor to CAT relief. 1 We lack jurisdiction to review the Immigration Judge’s finding Truong is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(A)(ii)- 2 Under our decision in Molina-Amezcua v. INS 3 and Truong’s stipulation, the government was not barred by the earlier grant of relief from reconsidering. We have already held that even if a petitioner is eligible for a § 212(c) waiver of an aggravated felony, 4 the underlying conviction “would nonetheless remain an aggravated felony for purposes of precluding his application for cancellation of removal” under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a). 5 Moreover, the statute providing for cancellation of removal states that an alien “who has been granted relief under section [212(c) ], as such [section was] in effect before September 30, 1996,” is not eligible for cancellation of removal. 6 Accordingly, we hold that Truong cannot seek simultaneous relief under both 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (c) and 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. . Bellout v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 975, 977-79 (9th Cir.2004). . 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C); Cedano-Viera v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1062, 1064 (9th Cir.2003); Molina-Amezcua v. INS, 6 F.3d 646, 647 (9th Cir.1993). . Molina-Amezcua v. INS, 6 F.3d 646, 647 (9th Cir.1993). . 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (c). . Becker v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1000, 1004 (9th Cir.2007). See also Rodriguez-Munoz v. Gonzales, 419 F.3d 245, 247-48 (3d Cir.2005). . 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(c)(6).