LUIS ROBERTO LEMUS RIVERA, AKA Luis Lemusrivera v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS ROBERTO LEMUS RIVERA, AKA
Luis Lemusrivera,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 15-70582
Agency No. A206-408-429
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 11, 2019**
Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Luis Roberto Lemus Rivera, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
DEC 13 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-70582
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in
part the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Lemus Rivera does not challenge the agency’s
dispositive bases for denying his claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under CAT. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir.
2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are
waived).
We do not consider the materials Lemus Rivera references in his opening
brief that are not part of the administrative record. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955,
963-64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Lemus Rivera’s contentions that he
established a nexus between the harm he experienced or fears in El Salvador and a
political opinion because he did not raise this claim before the BIA. See Barron v.
Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review
claims not presented to the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --