Alfonso Chamu-Chamu v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALFONSO CHAMU-CHAMU,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70034
Agency No. A204-436-509
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Alfonso Chamu-Chamu, 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 decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
MAR 15 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in
part the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Chamu-Chamu fails to challenge the agency’s
determination that he did not establish membership in a cognizable social group or
a nexus to a protected ground. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174,
1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in
waiver). Chamu-Chamu also fails to challenge the agency’s denial of CAT relief.
See id. Thus, Chamu-Chamu’s asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims
fail.
To the extent Chamu-Chamu challenges removability, we lack jurisdiction
to consider the issue because he did not raise it to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft,
358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not
presented to the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --