
    Claudio GODINEZ-MEJIA, a.k.a. Claudio Godinez, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    Nos. 06-75317, 07-72579.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
    
    Filed Jan. 4, 2010.
    Gabriela Kreutzer, Esquire, Principal Litigation Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Kathryn Deangelis, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated petitions for review, Claudio Godinez-Mejia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal, and the BIA’s order denying his motion to reopen. In light of intervening caselaw, we grant the petition for review in OS-75317 and remand, and we dismiss the petition for review in 07-72579.

After the BIA issued the orders under review, we held in Nicanor-Romero v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 992 (9th Cir.2008), that California Penal Code § 647.6 is not categorically a crime involving moral turpitude and that a modified categorical approach is required. 523 F.3d at 1007-08. We therefore grant the petition for review in 06-75317 and remand for further proceedings consistent with our decision in Nicanor-Romero.

In light of our disposition, we do not reach the petition for review in 07-72579.

IN 06-75317, PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

IN 07-72579, PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     