LUIS SANCHEZ-VERGARA and CONCEPCION IBARRA v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS SANCHEZ-VERGARA and
CONCEPCION IBARRA,
Petitioners,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-70203
Agency Nos. A075-595-502
A070-784-384
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 11, 2017**
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Luis Sanchez-Vergara, a native and citizen of Mexico, and Concepcion
Ibarra, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petition pro se for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying special rule cancellation of removal 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
JUL 19 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-70203
the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (“NACARA”). Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part
the petition for review.
Petitioners fail to address, and therefore waive any challenge to, the
agency’s determination that they did not establish eligibility for special rule
cancellation under NACARA. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th
Cir. 2011) (issues not raised in the opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ unexhausted contention
regarding eligibility for asylum and related relief. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d
1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (“We lack jurisdiction to review legal claims not
presented in an alien’s administrative proceedings before the BIA.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --