Tomasso Guerrini 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
TOMASSO GUERRINI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-75820
Agency No. A072-992-079
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Tomasso Guerrini, a native and citizen of Italy, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider.
We dismiss the petition for review.
FILED
OCT 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

06-75820 2
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Guerrini’s motion to
reconsider the discretionary denial of his application for adjustment of status,
where he has not raised a colorable due process challenge to the discretionary
determination. 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.”); Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012)
(“[W]here Congress explicitly withdraws our jurisdiction to review a final order of
deportation, our authority to review motions to reconsider or to reopen deportation
proceedings is thereby likewise withdrawn.” (citation omitted)).
Guerrini’s remaining contentions are unavailing or unexhausted. See Barron
v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --