Asminda Sylvia Ramon- Pedroza v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ASMINDA SYLVIA RAMON-
PEDROZA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71676
Agency No. A096-229-366
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 14, 2013**
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Asminda Sylvia Ramon-Pedroza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing
her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her applications
for cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
FILED
MAY 20 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

the Convention Against Torture. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Ramon-Pedroza failed to raise in her opening brief, and therefore has
waived, any challenge to the agency’s dispositive determinations that she is
removable and that she does not qualify for the relief requested. See Tijani v.
Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (noting the court generally will not
“take up arguments not raised in an alien’s opening brief”).
We lack jurisdiction to review Ramon-Pedroza’s contention that the IJ
should have given her more time to pursue her case because she failed to raise that
issue before the BIA, and thereby failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.
See id. (no jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in the petitioner’s
administrative proceedings before the BIA).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
12-71676 2

-- 2 of 2 --