Bernardo Morales Guadarrama; Yolanda Morales 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
BERNARDO MORALES
GUADARRAMA; YOLANDA
MORALES,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-75115
Agency Nos. A071-632-165
A095-300-261
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Bernardo Morales Guadarrama and Yolanda Morales, natives and citizens of
Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”)
order denying their motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
FILED
JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

08-75115 2
§ 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and
review de novo due process claims. Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th
Cir. 2002). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to
reopen where petitioners failed to demonstrate that evidence of Morales
Guadarrama’s medical conditions was previously unavailable. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(c); Romero-Ruiz v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1057, 1063-64 (9th Cir. 2008).
The evidence petitioners presented regarding their son’s psychological
condition with their motion to reopen concerned the same basic hardship grounds
as their application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439
F.3d 592, 602-03 (9th Cir. 2006). We therefore lack jurisdiction to review the
BIA’s discretionary determination that the evidence was insufficient to establish a
prima facie case of hardship. See id. at 601.
Petitioners’ contention that the BIA failed to consider evidence of hardship
to their U.S. citizen daughter is not supported by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 3 --

08-75115 3

-- 3 of 3 --