
    Engilberto LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-70376.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 18, 2014.
    
    Filed Feb. 26, 2014.
    Engilberto Lopez, Ellensburg, WA, pro se.
    Ann M. Welhaf, OIL, Robert Michael Stalzer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Engilberto Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from the decision of an immigration judge (“IJ”) denying Lopez’s application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s determination that Lopez did not merit cancellation of removal in the exercise of discretion. See Bermudez v. Holder, 586 F.3d 1167, 1169 (9th Cir.2009) (per curiam).

Lopez’s contentions that he qualifies for cancellation of removal, that his removal will cause him to suffer extreme hardship, and that the agency did not carefully review his cancellation application are not colorable questions of law that would invoke our jurisdiction. Id. (“‘[A]hy challenge of an [IJ’s] discretionary determination must present a colorable claim’ in order for this court to exercise jurisdiction.” (citation omitted)).

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