Joselyn Milagros Gomez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JOSELYN MILAGROS GOMEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71801
Agency No. A096-216-701
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Joselyn Milagros Gomez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for
voluntary departure. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-71801 2
de novo due process claims, Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th
Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
We reject Gomez’s contention that the BIA violated due process by failing
to address her fear of forced gang recruitment because she never applied for
asylum, withholding of removal, or relief under the Convention Against Torture.
See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on
a due process claim).
We lack jurisdiction to review Gomez’s contentions based on the IJ’s failure
to advise her regarding possible eligibility for asylum because she did not exhaust
the issue before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.
2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --