Bernardo Gallegos-Lomeli 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
BERNARDO GALLEGOS-LOMELI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73333
Agency No. A078-056-852
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Bernardo Gallegos-Lomeli, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
reopen. We dismiss the petition for review.
FILED
JUL 09 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-73333 2
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Gallegos-Lomeli’s
motion to reopen, because the evidence submitted with the motion concerns the
same basic hardship grounds that Gallegos-Lomeli previously relied on to support
his application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d
592, 601-03 (9th Cir. 2006).
Gallegos-Lomeli’s contentions that the BIA failed to consider the evidence
he submitted and failed to explain the reasons for denying his motion are not
supported by the record and do not amount to colorable constitutional claims that
would invoke our jurisdiction. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930
(9th Cir. 2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --