Juan Reynel-Salinas v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN REYNEL-SALINAS,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-73141
Agency No. A097-762-600
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 9, 2017**
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Juan Reynel-Salinas, 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 cancellation of removal. We dismiss the
petition for review.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 14 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-73141
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Reynel-Salinas failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his
qualifying relatives. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.
2005). Reynel-Salinas’ contentions that the agency failed to provide a reasoned
explanation, consider the totality of the circumstances, or consider relevant
arguments and evidence are not supported by the record and thus do not invoke our
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, 424
F.3d at 930 (“To be colorable in this context, . . . the claim must have some
possible validity.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --