Daniel Aguilar-Rodriguez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DANIEL AGUILAR-RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72685
Agency No. A046-994-761
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2010**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Daniel Aguilar-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of
FILED
DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-72685 2
constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d
889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
Aguilar-Rodriguez’s equal protection challenge fails because he is not
similarly situated to those permanent resident aliens who resided with a parent in
the United States for the seven years required under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2). See
Dillingham v. INS, 267 F.3d 996, 1007 (9th Cir. 2001) (to succeed on an equal
protection challenge, the petitioner must establish that his treatment differed from
that of similarly situated persons); see also Cuevas-Gaspar v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d
1013, 1028 (9th Cir. 2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --