FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROSENDO GARCIA AMBRIZ; DORA No. 06-75789
LETICIA GARCIA; SILVIA GARCIA
GUZMAN, Agency Nos. A075-752-430
A075-752-431
Petitioners, A075-752-432
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011 **
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioners Rosendo Garcia Ambriz, Dora Leticia Garcia, and Silvia Garcia
Guzman, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an Immigration
Judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th
Cir. 2008), and we grant the petition for review.
The agency declined to entertain Garcia Ambriz’s request to consider
additional evidence in support of his cancellation of removal application without
the benefit of our decision in Fernandes v. Holder, 619 F.3d 1069, 1074 (9th Cir.
2010) (“[T]he IJ’s jurisdiction on remand from the BIA is limited only when the
BIA expressly retains jurisdiction and qualifies or limits the scope of the remand to
a specific purpose.”). See also Matter of M-D-, 224 I. & N. Dec. 138, 141-42 (BIA
2007) (IJ has authority to consider additional evidence on remand “if it is material,
was not previously available, and could not have been discovered or presented at
the former hearing.”). We therefore remand for proceedings consistent with this
disposition.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 06-75789