Opinion
No. 07-74281.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed April 19, 2010.
Michael Franquinha, Esquire, Aguirre Law Group LLP, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner.
Terri Jane Scadron, Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAS-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A092-546-612.
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Magdaleno Luna-Vargas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying his application for cancellation of removal for legal permanent residents. We dismiss the petition for review.
Luna-Vargas' sole contention is that the IJ violated due process because his adverse credibility determination relied in part on a statement from a smuggled alien who wras not present to testify. We lack jurisdiction to review this contention because Luna-Vargas failed to raise it before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004); see also Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th Cir. 2004) ("A petitioner cannot satisfy the exhaustion requirement by making a general challenge to the IJ's decision, but, rather, must specify which issues form the basis of the appeal.").
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.