Luis Albert Cortes-Flores v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS ALBERT CORTES-FLORES,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 23-864
Agency No.
A206-236-796
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 10, 2023**
Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Luis Albert Cortes-Flores, 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
* 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).
FILED
OCT 19 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 23-864
questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005).
We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The agency did not err in declining to reach Cortes-Flores’s contentions as
to his statutory eligibility for cancellation of removal and as to whether he
established the requisite hardship to his qualifying relatives. See Simeonov v.
Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required
to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach).
Because Cortes-Flores does not otherwise raise a colorable legal or
constitutional claim, we lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s denial of
cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B); Patel v. Garland, 142 S.
Ct. 1614, 1622-23 (2022) (where the agency denies a form of relief listed in 8
U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), federal courts have jurisdiction to review constitutional
claims and questions of law, but not factual findings and discretionary decisions).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --