NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 2 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROCAEL MENDOZA GOMEZ, AKA No. 14-73552
Carlos Roberto Martinez,
Agency No. A077-284-171
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Rocael Mendoza Gomez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal.
We dismiss the petition for review.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Mendoza Gomez failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a
qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.
2005). Mendoza Gomez’s contention that the agency did not consider the future
impact of his removal on his children lacks support in the record and is not
sufficiently colorable to invoke our jurisdiction. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688
F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (absent a colorable legal or constitutional claim, the
court lacks jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary hardship
determination); Martinez-Rosas, 424 F.3d at 930 (“To be colorable in this context,
. . . the claim must have some possible validity.” (citation omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
2 14-73552