Inocencio Pena-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.
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
INOCENCIO PENA-ROMERO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-70699
Agency No. A097-762-960
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Inocencio Pena-Romero, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §1252. We review for substantial evidence
FILED
JUN 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-70699 2
the BIA’s continuous physical presence determination. Gutierrez v. Mukasey, 521
F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Pena-Romero
did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement because he testified that
he accepted voluntary departure in 1996, thereby interrupting his accrual of
continuous physical presence in the United States. See id. at 1117-18;
Vasquez-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 343 F.3d 961, 974 (9th Cir. 2003) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --