From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Galindo-Barrera v. Barr

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 23, 2019
No. 17-72257 (9th Cir. May. 23, 2019)

Opinion

No. 17-72257

05-23-2019

JOSE GALINDO-BARRERA, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Agency No. A205-587-678 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Jose Galindo-Barrera, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Galindo-Barrera does not raise, and therefore waives any challenge to, the BIA's denial of his motion to reopen as untimely. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are waived).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Galindo-Barrera's contentions regarding the agency's decision to deny reopening sua sponte, where he did not raise a legal or constitutional error that would invoke our jurisdiction. See Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016) (court can review BIA decisions denying sua sponte reopening only for the limited purpose of reviewing the reasoning behind the decision for legal or constitutional error).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.


Summaries of

Galindo-Barrera v. Barr

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 23, 2019
No. 17-72257 (9th Cir. May. 23, 2019)
Case details for

Galindo-Barrera v. Barr

Case Details

Full title:JOSE GALINDO-BARRERA, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 23, 2019

Citations

No. 17-72257 (9th Cir. May. 23, 2019)