Opinion
No. 05-76073.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed June 7, 2007.
Kristin A. Cabral, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Esq., Law Offices of Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Burlingame, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A77-820-109.
Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Enemecio Corona Ibanez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") denying his motion to reopen. We dismiss the petition for review.
The evidence Corona Ibanez presented with his motion to reopen concerned the same basic hardship grounds as his application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 602-03 (9th Cir. 2006). We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the BIA's discretionary determination that the evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of hardship. See id. at 601 (holding that if "the BIA determines that a motion to re-open proceedings in which there has already been an unreviewable discretionary determination concerning a statutory pre-requisite to relief does not make out a prima facie case for that relief," 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars this court from re-visiting the merits).