From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cassio-Alvarado v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 27, 2008
297 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 05-72885.

Submitted October 16, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable For decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed October 27, 2008.

Romy Schmalz, Esquire, Law of Romy Schmalz, Anchorage, AK, for Petitioner.

Christopher C. Fuller, Esquire, Michael P. Lindemann, Esquire, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, WWS-District Counsel, Esquire, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Office of the District Counsel, Seattle, WA, for Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A075-099-497.

Before: LEAVY, RYMER and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Carlos Gilberto Cassio-Alvarado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations. Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The IJ determined that Cassio-Alvarado provided false testimony for the purpose of obtaining an immigration benefit, thereby rendering him ineligible for cancellation of removal for lacking the requisite good moral character. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(6); see also, Ramos v. INS, 246 F.3d 1264, 1266 (9th Cir. 2001). Cassio-Alvarado's contention that the IJ did not adequately address his reason for giving false testimony is not supported by the record.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Cassio-Alvarado's contention that the IJ violated due process by exhibiting bias because he failed to raise it before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (due process challenges that are "procedural in nature" must be exhausted).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.


Summaries of

Cassio-Alvarado v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 27, 2008
297 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Cassio-Alvarado v. Mukasey

Case Details

Full title:Carlos Gilberto CASSIO-ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 27, 2008

Citations

297 F. App'x 665 (9th Cir. 2008)