Jose Luis Ceja-Garcia 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOSE LUIS CEJA-GARCIA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73317
Agency No. A076-690-128
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Ceja-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
FILED
JAN 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
With respect to adjustment of status, Ceja-Garcia points to no evidence in
the record, and we find none, that he requested a further continuance of the August
11, 2003, hearing. We therefore reject Ceja-Garcia’s contention that the IJ abused
his discretion in denying a continuance.
With respect to cancellation of removal, we lack jurisdiction to review Ceja-
Garcia’s due process claim that the BIA disregarded certain evidence in assessing
hardship because the claim is not colorable. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424
F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005) (“[T]raditional abuse of discretion challenges recast
as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims
that would invoke our jurisdiction.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part, DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --