Naira Karapetyan, a.k.a. Armenui Chivchyan 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NAIRA KARAPETYAN, a.k.a. Armenui
Chivchyan,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72100
Agency No. A078-015-329
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Naira Karapetyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen.
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
FILED
JUL 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-72100 2
discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Perez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 770, 773
(9th Cir. 2008) and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Karapetyan failed to raise any challenge to the BIA’s denial of her motion to
reopen. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues
not specifically raised in opening brief are deemed waived). Accordingly, we deny
the petition for review as to her motion to reopen.
To the extent Karapetyan challenges the BIA’s May 23, 2006 order
dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying her asylum
application, we lack jurisdiction because this petition for review is not timely as to
that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --