Humberto Becerra 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 concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HUMBERTO BECERRA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-75122
Agency No. A075-499-740
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Humberto Becerra, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision granting his application for
cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
JAN 20 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-75122 2
de novo questions of law, Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder, 580 F.3d 1102, 1104 (9th
Cir. 2009), and we grant the petition for review.
The BIA rejected Becerra’s contention that he was entitled to impute his
mother’s admission as a lawful permanent resident in order to satisfy the seven-
year period of continuous residence required for cancellation of removal. See 8
U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2). However, the BIA did not have the benefit of our decision
in Mercado-Zazueta, 580 F.3d at 1113-16, in which we recognized the ongoing
validity of Cuevas-Gaspar v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2005) (a parent’s
admission for permanent residence is imputed to unemancipated minor children
residing with the parent for the purpose of satisfying the required period of
continuous residence under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2)). We therefore remand to the
BIA to reconsider Becerra’s appeal.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --