Alfredo Melgoza-Ortiz 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
LR/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALFREDO MELGOZA-ORTIZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71965
Agency No. A077-355-332
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Alfredo Melgoza-Ortiz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

LR/Research 07-71965 2
removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and
deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Melgoza-Ortiz failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a
qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.
2005).
We do not consider Melgoza-Ortiz’s contentions regarding physical
presence and moral character, because his failure to establish hardship is
dispositive. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D).
Melgoza-Ortiz’s contention regarding a continuance to allow for hardship
testimony is unsupported by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --