Lijuan Zhu v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LIJUAN ZHU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70639
Agency No. A097-664-788
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Lijuan Zhu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen. We dismiss
the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision not to invoke
FILED
APR 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-70639 2
its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See
Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
We also lack jurisdiction to consider Zhu’s contentions regarding the
hardship her removal will cause her U.S. citizen husband and her claim of
ineffective assistance of counsel where she did not raise these contentions before
the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (this court
lacks jurisdiction over contentions not raised before the BIA); see also Puga v.
Chertoff, 488 F.3d 812, 815-816 (9th Cir. 2007) (indicating that ineffective
assistance of counsel claims must be raised in a motion to reopen before the BIA).
Zhu’s remaining contentions are without merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --