JUAN RUIZ-MARTINEZ, AKA Juan Ruiz v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN RUIZ-MARTINEZ, AKA Juan Ruiz,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-72962
Agency No. A099-824-839
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 12, 2018**
Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Juan Ruiz-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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).
FILED
JUN 18 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-72962
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Ruiz-Martinez failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his
qualifying relatives. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.
2005). Although the court would retain jurisdiction over colorable questions of law
and constitutional claims, Ruiz-Martinez’s contentions that the agency failed to
consider relevant evidence, engaged in improper conjecture, and failed to provide
reasoned explanations to support its decisions are not supported by the record and
do not amount to colorable claims. See id. (“To be colorable in this context, . . . the
claim must have some possible validity.” (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)); Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (BIA is only
required to “announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable” review).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --