Narrative Opinion Summary
Jose Antonio de la Rosa Calva, his wife Mercedes de las Nieves de la Rosa Gomez, and their children, Pamela and Oscar de la Rosa Gomez, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) summary affirmation of an immigration judge's denial of their asylum application and withholding of removal. The petitioners argue that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate their due process rights; however, this argument is precluded by the precedent set in Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, which confirms that the BIA’s streamlining procedures do not infringe upon due process rights. The Clerk is instructed to stay the mandate pending the outcome of Desta v. Ashcroft. The petition for review is denied, and this decision is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in this circuit except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Due Process Rights in Immigration Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied the precedent from Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft to determine that the BIA's streamlining procedures do not violate due process rights.
Reasoning: The petitioners argue that the BIA’s streamlining regulations violate their due process rights; however, this argument is precluded by the precedent set in Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, which confirms that the BIA’s streamlining procedures do not infringe upon due process rights.
Publication and Citation of Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision in this case is deemed not suitable for publication and may not be cited in this circuit except under specific rules.
Reasoning: The petition for review is denied, and this decision is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in this circuit except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.