Reyes-Vasquez v. Ashcroft, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 147116 (8th Cir. January 25, 2005) (petition for review of the determination of the Immigration Judge and the BIA that noncitizen is not entitled to cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1229b(b) may be considered despite the lack of a reasoned opinion, and is granted because, "[a]lthough the decision to grant cancellation of removal is a discretionary act by the Attorney General that we may not review, 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B); Halabi v. Ashcroft, 316 F.3d 807, 808 (8th Cir. 2003) (per curiam), we may consider the predicate legal question whether the IJ properly applied the law to the facts in determining an individual's eligibility to be considered for the relief"), citing Morales-Morales v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 418, 421-22 (7th Cir. 2004); Mireles-Valdez v. Ashcroft, 349 F.3d 213, 216-17 (5th Cir. 2003) (holding that the continuous presence requirement "is a nondiscretionary determination because it involves straightforward statutory interpretation and application of law to fact")