Victor M. Romero 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.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VICTOR M. ROMERO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74937
Agency No. A071-523-943
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Department of Homeland Security
Submitted March 6, 2012**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Victor M. Romero, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Department of Homeland Security’s order reinstating his 1992 exclusion order
under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review de novo due process claims and questions of law, Garcia de Rincon v.
FILED
MAR 14 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74937 2
Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 539 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the
petition for review.
Because Romero failed to demonstrate a gross miscarriage of justice in his
initial exclusion proceeding, he may not at this point collaterally attack his 1992
exclusion order. See id. at 1137-38 (while a petitioner is generally prevented from
collaterally attacking an underlying removal order on constitutional or legal
grounds, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) permits some measure of review if he can
demonstrate a “gross miscarriage of justice” in the prior proceedings).
Romero’s contention that the agency erred in applying the reinstatement
provision to him because he is eligible for adjustment of status under the special
adjustment provision, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i), is unpersuasive. See Padilla v. Ashcroft,
334 F.3d 921, 925-26 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --