Christian Martinez-Lopez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States , 259 F.3d 1198 ( 2001 )
Menu:
-
259 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2001)
CHRISTIAN MARTINEZ-LOPEZ, Petitioner,
v.
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.No. 01-70212
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Submitted June 28, 20011
Filed June 28, 2001Kevin A. Bove, Esq. Escondido, California, for the petitioner.
Marion E. Guyton, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C. for the respondent.
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, INS No. Agx-cqk-vtr
Before: Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, Barry G. Silverman and Ronald M. Gould, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
1Pending before us is respondent's motion to dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i).
2The Immigration Judge found petitioner removable as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). The Immigration Judge also denied petitioner's request for voluntary departure, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229c. Petitioner appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, challenging the Immigration Judge's denial of voluntary departure. The Board affirmed the Immigration Judge's decision without opinion.
3We recently held in Montero-Martinez v. Ashcroft , 249 F.3d 1156, 1158 (9th Cir. 2001), that pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), there is no jurisdiction to review the statutory eligibility for cancellation of removal and the discretionary decision of whether to grant cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b. Because section 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) also provides that there is"no jurisdiction to review any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section 1229c," this court lacks jurisdiction to review voluntary departure decisions. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); see also Montero-Martinez, at 1158.
4Accordingly, respondent's motion to dismiss is granted.
5All pending motions are denied as moot.
6THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IS DISMISSED.
Notes:
1The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Document Info
Docket Number: 01-70212
Citation Numbers: 259 F.3d 1198
Judges: Gould, O'Scannlain, Silverman
Filed Date: 6/28/2001
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 8/5/2023