Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Alien sought review of decision of Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) not to grant alien relief from deportation based on extreme hardship or good moral character. The Court of Appeals held that: (1) it lacked jurisdiction to review BIA's discretionary decision not to grant alien relief from deportation based on extreme hardship or good moral character and (2) it lacked jurisdiction to review whether the BIA abused its discretion by describing alien's sentence incorrectly or failing to have before it immigration judge's fraud waiver.
Affirmed.
Appeal from a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Page 497.
Before ALARC ON, KOZINSKI and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
This case is governed by the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Under the transitional rules, we have no jurisdiction to review the discretionary decisions of the Attorney General under INA §§ 212(h) or 212(i). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). Thus, we may not review the BIA's decision not to grant Ferrer relief from deportation based on "extreme hardship" or "good moral character." Likewise, we have no jurisdiction under the immigration laws to consider whether the BIA abused its discretion by describing Ferrer's sentence incorrectly or failing to have before it the immigration judge's "fraud waiver." See id.
DISMISSED.