Maria Del Socorro LOPEZ-RIVERA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent, 261 F. App'x 940

MEMORANDUM Maria Del Socorro Lopez-Rivera seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s (“U”) order denying her application for cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, see Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that Lopez-Rivera failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). Lopez-Rivera’s contention that the IJ violated her due process rights by disregarding her evidence of hardship does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim. See Martinez-Rosas v.

Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) (“[Traditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged due process violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.”). We are not persuaded that Lopez-Rivera’s removal results in the deprivation of her children’s rights. See Cabrera-Alvarez v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1006, 1012-13 (9th Cir.2005). PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.