From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miranda-Lopez v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 22, 2022
No. 15-72590 (9th Cir. Jun. 22, 2022)

Opinion

15-72590

06-22-2022

DOMINGO MIRANDA-LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted June 15, 2022

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

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A200-807-666

Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

Domingo Miranda-Lopez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

In Miranda-Lopez's opening brief he does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the agency's dispositive conclusion that he failed to establish either of his proposed particular social groups were cognizable. 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). Substantial evidence supports the agency's determination that Miranda-Lopez is not a member of a particular social group analogous to the group analyzed in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc).

We lack jurisdiction to consider the new particular social groups Miranda-Lopez raises in his opening brief because he failed to raise them before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not presented to the agency).

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).


Summaries of

Miranda-Lopez v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 22, 2022
No. 15-72590 (9th Cir. Jun. 22, 2022)
Case details for

Miranda-Lopez v. Garland

Case Details

Full title:DOMINGO MIRANDA-LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 22, 2022

Citations

No. 15-72590 (9th Cir. Jun. 22, 2022)