Filed: Jun. 16, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-3476 _ Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Board * of Immigration Appeals. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General * of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. * _ Submitted: June 11, 2010 Filed: June 16, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Mexican citizen Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigratio
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-3476 _ Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Board * of Immigration Appeals. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General * of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. * _ Submitted: June 11, 2010 Filed: June 16, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Mexican citizen Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-3476
___________
Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos, *
*
Petitioner, *
* Petition for Review of
v. * an Order of the Board
* of Immigration Appeals.
Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General *
of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Respondent. *
___________
Submitted: June 11, 2010
Filed: June 16, 2010
___________
Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Mexican citizen Salvador Rodriguez-Ramos petitions for review of an order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals, which affirmed an immigration judge’s (IJ’s)
denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Rodriguez-Ramos challenges
the IJ’s determination that he abandoned his application by failing to update his
fingerprints, and that he did not demonstrate good cause to excuse his failure. After
careful review, see Arellano-Hernandez v. Holder,
564 F.3d 906, 910 (8th Cir. 2009);
Dedji v. Mukasey,
525 F.3d 187, 191-92 (2d Cir. 2008), we conclude his challenge
lacks merit, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(c)-(d). Accordingly, we deny the petition for
review. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________