Silder Isaias Zuniga Ramos v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SILDER ISAIAS ZUNIGA RAMOS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-71999
Agency No. A070-642-371
ORDER*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 4, 2015**
San Francisco, California
Before: TALLMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and MURPHY, District
Judge.***
Petitioner, Silder Isaias Zuniga Ramos contends he is eligible for Special
Rule Cancellation for one of two reasons: (1) he indeed “filed” an asylum
FILED
FEB 06 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).
*** The Honorable Stephen Joseph Murphy III, District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

application before April 1, 1990; and (2) he is an ABC class member that
demonstrated an “intent” to register by his 1988 and 1993 asylum applications.
See American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh (“ABC”), 760 F. Supp. 796 (N.D.
Cal. 1991). “IIRIRA expressly precludes federal courts from reviewing the
agency’s factual determination that an immigrant is ineligible for ABC benefits []
or special rule cancellation of removal under NACARA § 203.” Ixcot v. Holder,
646 F.3d 1202, 1213–14 (9th Cir. 2011). “Section 309(c)(5)(C)(ii) [of IIRIRA ]
provides that ‘[a] determination by the Attorney General as to whether an alien
satisfies the requirements of clause (i) is final and shall not be subject to review by
any court.’ Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to determine [petitioner’s] statutory
eligibility for NACARA § 203 relief.” Lanuza v. Holder, 597 F.3d 970, 971 (9th
Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (citation omitted).
DISMISSED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --