                                                                           FILED
                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            AUG 31 2010

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS




                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



FRANCISCO MENDEZ CAMARILLO,                      No. 06-70921

               Petitioner,                       Agency No. A092-928-816

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

               Respondent.



                      On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals

                             Submitted August 23, 2010 **

Before:        LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

       Francisco Mendez Camarillo, 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 removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.




          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 1252. We review de novo questions of law and constitutional claims, Khan v.

Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 776 (9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the petition for review.

      Mendez Camarillo does not challenge the agency’s determination that he is

removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) based on his 1992 conviction for

“continuous sexual abuse of a child” in violation of California Penal Code § 288.5.

      The BIA determined that Mendez Camarillo is ineligible for relief under

former section 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (repealed 1996), because his ground of

removability lacks a statutory counterpart in a ground of inadmissibility. See 8

C.F.R. § 1212.3(f)(5). Mendez Camarillo’s equal protection challenge to this

determination is unavailing. See Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203, 1207 (9th Cir.

2009) (en banc).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.




                                          2                                   06-70921
