Edgar Sanchez Escobedo; Martha Sanchez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
EDGAR SANCHEZ ESCOBEDO;
MARTHA SANCHEZ,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73673
Agency Nos. A075-753-388
A075-753-269
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 10, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, HAWKINS, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Edgar Sanchez Escobedo and Martha Sanchez, natives and citizens of
Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”)
order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is
FILED
AUG 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73673 2
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
In their opening brief, petitioners fail to address, and therefore have waived
any challenge to, the BIA’s denial of their motion to reopen. See
Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not
specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s March 24, 2008, order dismissing
petitioners’ direct appeal because this petition for review is not timely as to that
order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir.
2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --