Alfredo Ruiz Martinez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ALFREDO RUIZ MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70885
Agency No. A079-535-463
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.
Alfredo Ruiz Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo due process claims. Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d
FILED
JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-70885 2
510, 516 (9th Cir. 2001). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for
review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Ruiz Martinez’s contentions that neither the
IJ nor his former attorney elicited testimony regarding his entry date because he
did not exhaust these claims before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674,
677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (this court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not
raised before the agency).
Ruiz Martinez’s contention that the IJ failed to ascertain whether the
withdrawal of his cancellation of removal application was knowing and voluntary
is not supported by the record.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --