Luis Gabriel Oropeza 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
LUIS GABRIEL OROPEZA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72677
Agency No. A099-288-811
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Luis Gabriel Oropeza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings and de novo
FILED
NOV 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72677 2
questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005).
We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Oropeza is
inadmissible because the record indicates he made a false claim to United States
citizenship to gain entry to the United States on April 2, 2000. See Pichardo v.
INS, 216 F.3d 1198, 1201 (9th Cir. 2000) (false claim to United States citizenship
is a “non-waivable ground of inadmissibility” under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii));
see also Llanos-Senarillos v. United States, 177 F.2d 164, 165-66 (9th Cir. 1949)
(withdrawal of false testimony after petitioner knows it will not deceive is not a
voluntary and timely recantation). Oropeza is therefore ineligible for adjustment of
status. See 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a)(2) (applicant for adjustment of status must be
admissible to the United States).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --