Graciela Fuentes-Aguilera v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GRACIELA FUENTES-AGUILERA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-72160
Agency No. A201-156-214
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 13, 2016**
Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Graciela Fuentes-Aguilera, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting voluntary departure. Our jurisdiction
is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo constitutional claims.
FILED
APR 18 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 620 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part
and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Fuentes-Aguilera’s unexhausted contention
that she is eligible for cancellation of removal as she did not pursue this form of
relief before the IJ. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (the
court lacks jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an alien’s
administrative proceedings before the agency).
Fuentes-Aguilera’s contention that the IJ violated due process by not giving
her the opportunity to apply for cancellation of removal is belied by the record.
See Ibarra-Flores, 439 F.3d at 620-21 (due process claims require showing that
proceedings were “so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from
reasonably presenting his case”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
14-72160 2

-- 2 of 2 --