Pablino Cardona Mondragon 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
PABLINO CARDONA MONDRAGON,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
Nos. 06-73231
06-75331
Agency No. A091-462-203
MEMORANDUM*
On Petitions for Review of Orders of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated petitions for review, Pablino Cardona Mondragon, a
native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ order (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s
removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
FILED
SEP 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

06-73231 2
questions of law and constitutional claims. Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 776 (9th
Cir. 2009). We deny the petitions for review.
Mondragon does not challenge the agency’s determination that he is
removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) based on his conviction for lewd or
lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age in violation of California Penal
Code § 288(a).
The agency determined that Mondragon is ineligible for relief under former
section 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (repealed 1996), because his ground of
removability lacks a statutory counterpart in a ground of inadmissibility. See
8 C.F.R. § 1212.3(f)(5). Mondragon’s legal and equal protection challenges to this
determination are unavailing. See Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203, 1206, 1208
n.7 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc).
Mondragon has waived any challenge to the BIA’s October 19, 2005, order
denying his motion to reconsider.
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --