United States v. 2020-03-11 | 16-70147 | OSCAR SANCHEZ-ORDAZ V. WILLIAM BARR | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OSCAR SANCHEZ-ORDAZ,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 16-70147

Agency No. A095-736-873

MEMORANDUM
*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 3, 2020
**

Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Oscar Sanchez-Ordaz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion an
immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We dismiss the
petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Sanchez-Ordaz’s sole, unexhausted

*
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 11 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 16-70147
contention that his conviction would be eligible for Federal First Offender Act
treatment. See Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 2004) (“the
exhaustion requirement applies to ‘streamlined’ cases”); Garcia-Cortez v.
Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 749, 753 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The Notice of Appeal is sufficiently
specific if the alien explains in a short and plain statement exactly how and why
the IJ erred. . . . [C]onclusory or generalized statements that the IJ abused his
discretion or wrongfully ordered the alien’s removal fail to meet the specificity
requirement, because they do not meaningfully direct the BIA in its review.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.