ALFREDO IMANIL, AKA Karl Koja v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALFREDO IMANIL, AKA Karl Koja,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-70179
Agency No. A031-230-136
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Alfredo Imanil, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions pro se 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 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
FEB 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-70179
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s denial of cancellation of removal
as a matter of discretion. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Monroy v. Lynch, 821
F.3d 1175, 1177-78 (9th Cir. 2016) (holding that petitioner did not raise a
reviewable issue because “he simply disagrees with the agency’s weighing of his
positive equities and the negative factors”).
Although the court would retain jurisdiction over colorable questions of law
and constitutional claims, Imanil raises no such claim. See 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 and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --