Jundi v. Gonzales , 225 F. App'x 312 ( 2007 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 27, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-60430
Summary Calendar
IBRAHIM JUNDI,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A74 899 271
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ibrahim Jundi, a native of Sierra Leone and a citizen of
Lebanon, challenges the denial of his petition for waiver of the
requirements for removal of his conditional residency status and
the denial of his request for cancellation of removal.
Following his marriage to a U.S. citizen, Jundi was granted
permanent resident status on a conditional basis; after his
divorce, Jundi sought a waiver of the requirements for removal of
his conditional status. Relief under the waiver provisions of
8 U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4) is discretionary. This court lacks
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 06-60430
-2-
jurisdiction to review the denial of discretionary decisions of
the Attorney General. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii); see also
Assaad v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 471, 475 (5th Cir. 2004).
Jundi also argues that he was denied due process because the
immigration judge announced his conclusion on the waiver issue
before Jundi’s counsel was allowed to conduct a direct
examination of Jundi. This court does have jurisdiction to
review constitutional claims. § 1252(a)(2)(D). However, as the
waiver Jundi sought was purely discretionary, he was not deprived
of any liberty interest and thus no due process right attached.
See Assaad, 378 F.3d at 475; Gutierrez-Morales v. Homan, 461 F.3d
605, 609 (5th Cir. 2006).
Jundi also challenges the denial of his request for
cancellation of removal. The finding that Jundi had not
established that his U.S. citizen children would face hardship if
he were removed involved the exercise of discretion; therefore,
this court lacks jurisdiction to review the determination. Rueda
v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 831, 831 (5th Cir. 2004); see also
§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(i).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.