Lugo-Miramontes v. Holder ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           DEC 30 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    CARLOS ALFREDO LUGO-                              No. 08-70443
    MIRAMONTES,
    Agency No. A077-195-285
    Petitioner,
    v.                                              MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted December 19, 2011 **
    Before:        GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    Carlos Alfredo Lugo-Miramontes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
    for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
    an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for adjustment of status
    and waivers of inadmissibility under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1182
    (a)(9)(B)(v) and 1182(i). Our
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    jurisdiction is governed by 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review de novo questions of law.
    Hamazaspyan v. Holder, 
    590 F.3d 744
    , 747 (9th Cir. 2009). We dismiss in part
    and deny in part the petition for review.
    We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s decision to deny Lugo-
    Miramontes’ applications for waivers of inadmissibility, which were denied for
    failure to show extreme hardship to a qualifying relative, as well as his application
    for adjustment of status, which was denied in the exercise of discretion. See 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    (a)(2)(B).
    Lugo-Miramontes’ contention that the agency erroneously relied on his
    attempted fraudulent entry in 1998 to deny his applications for relief is not
    supported by the record, and therefore does not amount to a colorable
    constitutional claim.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
    2                                   08-70443
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-70443

Judges: Goodwin, Wallace, McKeown

Filed Date: 12/30/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024