Fabio Orlando Cruz Torres, a.k.a. Orlando Flabio Cruz, a.k.a. Flabio Nino v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FABIO ORLANDO CRUZ TORRES,
a.k.a. Orlando Flabio Cruz, a.k.a. Flabio
Nino,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-72805
Agency No. A200-709-702
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 10, 2013**
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Fabio Orlando Cruz Torres, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his
appeal from the decision of an immigration judge (“IJ”) denying his motion to
FILED
JUN 13 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-72805 2
continue his removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review de novo whether the BIA applied the correct legal criteria.
Kawashima v. Holder, 615 F.3d 1043, 1057 n.8 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA applied the correct legal criteria in affirming the IJ’s denial of Cruz
Torres’s motion to continue, where the BIA invoked the applicable “good cause”
legal standard and cited pertinent legal authorities. See Mendez-Castro v.
Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that “the IJ applied the
correct legal standard” where “the IJ expressly cited and applied [relevant case
law] in rendering its decision, which is all our review requires”).
We lack jurisdiction to review Cruz Torres’s contention that the agency
abused its discretion by denying his motion to continue, because Cruz Torres does
not challenge the BIA’s determination that his conviction under California Heath
and Safety Code § 11350(a) is a controlled-substance violation that renders him
inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II). See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C)-
(D) (limiting the court’s jurisdiction to constitutional claims and questions of law
in cases involving petitioners who are inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --