
    Raul Juarez HERNANDEZ; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-71291.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 5, 2006.
    
    Filed June 9, 2006.
    Murray D. Hilts, Esq., Law Offices of Murray Hilts, San Diego, CA, for Petitioners.
    CAS-Distriet Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, T.G. NELSON and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

We have reviewed the response to the court’s March 22, 2006, order to show cause, and we conclude that petitioners Raul Juarez Hernandez and Josefa Cortez Galindo have failed to raise a colorable constitutional claim to invoke our jurisdiction over this petition for review. See Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). Accordingly, we dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction with respect to petitioners Juarez Hernandez and Cortez Galindo. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003); Montero-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 277 F.3d 1137, 1144 (9th Cir.2002).

Petitioners Yesenia Juarez Cortez and Dulce Maria Juarez Cortez do not have a qualifying relative for purposes of cancellation of removal. Accordingly, the court summarily denies this petition for review with respect to these petitioners. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D); Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir.2002).

DISMISSED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     