Felix Hernandez-Arroyo v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FELIX HERNANDEZ-ARROYO,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 15-71206
Agency No. A200-978-988
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2016**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Felix Hernandez-Arroyo, 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.
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of
FILED
DEC 19 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

law. Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We dismiss in part
and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that
Hernandez-Arroyo failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a
qualifying relative. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.
2005).
Hernandez-Arroyo’s contentions that the BIA applied an incorrect legal
standard, considered facts not in the record, failed to show proper consideration of
all factors, and failed to address all issues raised on appeal are not supported by the
record. See Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (agency need
not “write an exegesis on every contention” (internal citation omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
15-71206 2

-- 2 of 2 --