The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed November 19, 2010.
Fortino Cholula-Rios, Eloy, AZ, pro se.
OIL, David H. Wetmore, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A092-903-609.
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Fortino Cholula-Rios, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") removal order. We dismiss the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency's discretionary denial of Cholula-Rios's cancellation of removal application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Bermudez v. Holder, 586 F.3d 1167, 1169 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). Cholula-Rios's challenge to the IJ's weighing of the evidence is not a legal argument that confers jurisdiction.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.