The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-71952•Lorena Jimenez Rivera v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
14-71952Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApr 23, 2019
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LORENA JIMENEZ RIVERA,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-71952
Agency No. A074-826-105
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 17, 2019**
Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Lorena Jimenez Rivera, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
* 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
APR 23 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 14-71952
Jimenez Rivera does not raise, and therefore waives any challenge to, the
BIA’s dispositive determination that, assuming credibility, she could not show the
ten years of continuous physical presence required for cancellation of removal
because she testified she was not in the United States for approximately three years
from 1991 to 1994. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th
Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are
waived); 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(2) (a departure in excess of 90 days
breaks continuous physical presence).
In light of this determination, we need not address Jimenez Rivera’s
contentions regarding credibility or whether documentary evidence establishes the
date of her initial entry into the United States. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d
532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and the agency are not required to make findings
on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.