Fernando Manuel Mecinas; Dorotea Alvarez v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

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).
JTK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FERNANDO MANUEL MECINAS;
DOROTEA ALVAREZ,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73312
Agency Nos. A079-534-450
A079-534-451
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Fernando Manuel Mecinas and Dorotea Alvarez, natives and citizens of
Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigrations Appeals’ (“BIA”)
order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is
FILED
FEB 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JTK/Research 07-73312 2
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
In their opening brief, petitioners fail to address, and therefore have waived
any challenge to, the BIA’s denial of their motion to reopen. See
Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not
specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s December 11, 2006, order
dismissing petitioners’ direct appeal because this petition for review is not timely
as to that order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th
Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --