Reynaldo Ayon-Nunez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
REYNALDO AYON-NUNEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73236
Agency No. A078-057-992
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reynaldo Ayon-Nunez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen.
We dismiss the petition for review.
FILED
DEC 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-73236 2
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Ayon-Nunez’s motion to
reopen the discretionary denial of his application for adjustment of status, where
the BIA concluded that the new evidence he submitted was insufficient to
overcome the significant negative factor in his case and Ayon-Nunez has not raised
a colorable due process challenge to the BIA’s discretionary determination that he
is not entitled to adjustment of status. See Bazua-Cota v. Gonzales, 466 F.3d 747,
748-49 (9th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (order) (“[T]he decision to deny Petitioner’s
application for adjustment of status is a discretionary determination, and is
therefore unreviewable.”); see Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601-03 (9th
Cir. 2006) (where there has already been an unreviewable discretionary
determination this court lacks jurisdiction to review the denial of a motion to
reopen concerning the same determination).
In light of our disposition, we do not reach Ayon-Nunez’s remaining
contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --