Namsraidorj Mijid v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NAMSRAIDORJ MIJID,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70208
Agency No. A200-243-475
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 14, 2015**
Before: SILVERMAN, BERZON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Namsraidorj Mijid, a native and citizen of Mongolia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
FILED
OCT 21 2015
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 --

Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of
law, including questions pertaining to our own jurisdiction. Ruiz-Morales v.
Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1219, 1221 (9th Cir.2004). We dismiss the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Mijid’s contentions regarding the IJ’s denial
of his right to counsel and denial of his right to a full and fair hearing because he
failed to raise these due process claims to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358
F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (no jurisdiction over claims not presented below).
We reject Mijid’s contention that his arguments did not need to be exhausted. See
Sola v. Holder, 720 F.3d 1134, 1136 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam) (“[C]hallenges to
procedural errors correctable by the administrative tribunal must be exhausted
before we undertake review”) (citation and internal quotation omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
12-70208 2

-- 2 of 2 --