Evvers Rafael Guevara- Moreno 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
EVVERS RAFAEL GUEVARA-
MORENO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72110
Agency No. A036-064-070
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Evvers Rafael Guevara-Moreno, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision vacating an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting cancellation of removal. Our
FILED
SEP 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72110 2
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law.
Brezilien v. Holder, 569 F.3d 403, 411 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and
dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA denied cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion and this
court lacks jurisdiction to review such discretionary decisions. Romero-Torres v.
Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir. 2003).
Guevara-Moreno’s contention that the BIA exceeded its authority by
engaging in fact-finding is not persuasive because the BIA reversed the IJ’s
decision as a matter of discretion, based on the facts found by the IJ, and did not
find new facts. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii) (“The Board may review questions
of law, discretion, and judgment and all other issues in appeals from decisions of
immigration judges de novo.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --