Griselda Fernandez-Sanchez v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

19-73057Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJan 24, 2022

Full text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GRISELDA FERNANDEZ-SANCHEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 19-73057
Agency No. A200-551-973
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 19, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Griselda Fernandez-Sanchez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
terminate proceedings and dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s
(“IJ”) decision denying her motion for a continuance. We have jurisdiction under
* 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
JAN 24 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 19-73057
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
terminate. Dominguez v. Barr, 975 F.3d 725, 734 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the
petition for review.
In her opening brief, Fernandez-Sanchez does not raise any challenge to the
agency’s denial of her motion for a continuance. 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).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Fernandez-Sanchez’s
motion to terminate removal proceedings, where her challenges to the immigration
court’s jurisdiction are foreclosed by Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158, 1159
(9th Cir. 2019), and Aguilar Fermin v. Barr, 958 F.3d 887, 895 n.4 (9th Cir. 2020),
because she received a notice of hearing that included the time, date, and place of
the hearing.
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.