Carlos Martinez Gutierrez 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.
Following the death of Judge Beezer, Judge Clifton was drawn to**
replace Judge Beezer on the panel.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS MARTINEZ GUTIERREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70436
Agency No. A078-463-557
MEMORANDUM*
On Remand From The United States Supreme Court
Before: TALLMAN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.**
Carlos Martinez Gutierrez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ (“BIA”) order upholding an immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of
removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a). In our original decision, we relied on
Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder, 580 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2009), to hold that Martinez
Gutierrez could impute his father’s legal status to himself to meet the five-year
FILED
JUL 11 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70436 2
lawful permanent residence requirement under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(1). We
therefore granted the petition for review. Martinez Gutierrez v. Holder, 411 F.
App’x 121 (9th Cir. 2011) (unpublished). The Supreme Court granted certiorari,
Holder v. Martinez Gutierrez, 132 S. Ct. 71 (2011), and reversed our decision,
Holder v. Martinez Gutierrez, 132 S. Ct. 2011 (2012).
Because Mercado-Zazueta is no longer valid precedent on the issue of
imputation under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b, see Sawyers v. Holder, — F.3d — , 2012 WL
2507513 (9th Cir. June 29, 2012) (per curiam), we now reject Martinez Gutierrez’s
imputation argument concerning his father’s lawful permanent residence.
As the parties do not dispute that Martinez Gutierrez, on his own, lacks the
requisite lawful permanent residence, we uphold the BIA’s decision to deny
cancellation of removal.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --