Magdaleno Luna-Vargas 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MAGDALENO LUNA-VARGAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74281
Agency No. A092-546-612
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Magdaleno Luna-Vargas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming
FILED
APR 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74281 2
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of
removal for legal permanent residents. We dismiss the petition for review.
Luna-Vargas’ sole contention is that the IJ violated due process because his
adverse credibility determination relied in part on a statement from a smuggled
alien who was not present to testify. We lack jurisdiction to review this contention
because Luna-Vargas failed to raise it before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358
F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004); see also Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th
Cir. 2004) (“A petitioner cannot satisfy the exhaustion requirement by making a
general challenge to the IJ’s decision, but, rather, must specify which issues form
the basis of the appeal.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --