Carlos Ovidio Aguilar-Mejia v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS OVIDIO AGUILAR-MEJIA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-72220
Agency No. A073-951-904
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 15, 2016**
Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Ovidio Aguilar-Mejia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration
judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the
petition for review.
FILED
MAR 22 2016
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).

-- 1 of 2 --

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Aguilar-Mejia failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a
qualifying relative. See De Mercado v. Mukasey, 566 F.3d 810, 814 (9th Cir.
2008). Aguilar-Mejia’s contentions that the agency committed legal error in not
conducting a future-oriented hardship analysis and violated due process by failing
to consider documentary evidence lack any support in the record and thus do not
invoke jurisdiction. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012)
(absent a colorable legal or constitutional claim, the court lacks jurisdiction to
review the agency’s discretionary determination regarding hardship); Martinez-
Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005) (“To be colorable in this
context, ... the claim must have some possible validity.” (citation omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
14-72220 2

-- 2 of 2 --