You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Salazar v. Ashcroft

Citation: 92 F. App'x 528Docket: No. 02-71098

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; March 23, 2004; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Evangelina Angel Salazar, a Mexican national, filed a pro se petition for review regarding the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary affirmation of an immigration judge's denial of her cancellation of removal application. The petition is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction to review the immigration judge’s discretionary finding that Salazar did not demonstrate the required "exceptional and extremely unusual hardship" necessary for cancellation. The court noted that it does not need to assess whether Salazar proved ten years of continuous physical presence in the U.S. The decision is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in future cases, as per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Immigration Decisions

Application: The court dismissed the petition due to lack of jurisdiction to review the immigration judge’s discretionary determination.

Reasoning: The petition is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction to review the immigration judge’s discretionary finding that Salazar did not demonstrate the required 'exceptional and extremely unusual hardship' necessary for cancellation.

Precedential Value and Citation Restrictions

Application: The decision in this case is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in future cases.

Reasoning: The decision is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in future cases, as per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Requirements for Cancellation of Removal

Application: The court focused on the discretionary finding regarding the 'exceptional and extremely unusual hardship' requirement, without evaluating the continuous physical presence.

Reasoning: The court noted that it does not need to assess whether Salazar proved ten years of continuous physical presence in the U.S.