Leonardo Arturo Brenes Escobar 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
LEONARDO ARTURO BRENES
ESCOBAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71415
Agency No. A095-004-392
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Leonardo Arturo Brenes Escobar, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Freeman
FILED
APR 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-71415 2
v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1031, 1037 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for
review.
The BIA properly concluded that Brenes Escobar did not establish eligibility
for adjustment of status where he did not file an application for that form of relief
or present evidence that he is the beneficiary of an approved or pending immigrant
visa petition. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229a(c)(4), 1255(a).
Removal proceedings are separate and apart from bond proceedings, see 8
C.F.R. § 1003.19(d), thus the BIA properly determined it did not have jurisdiction
to review Brenes Escobar’s challenge to his bond proceedings in an appeal from
removal proceedings.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --