Fernando Enrique Recinos v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FERNANDO ENRIQUE RECINOS,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-71812
Agency No. A040-427-185
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 18, 2019**
Before: FARRIS, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Fernando Enrique Recinos, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying his motion to reopen. Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part
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
SEP 26 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-71812
Recinos does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the BIA’s
denial of his motion to reopen. 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).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Recinos’s unexhausted ineffective
assistance of counsel claim, which must first be raised in a motion to reopen before
the BIA. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (“We lack
jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative
proceedings before the BIA.”); Liu v. Waters, 55 F.3d 421, 424 (9th Cir. 1995) (“A
petitioner must make a motion for the BIA to reopen before we will hold that he
has exhausted his [ineffective assistance of counsel] claims.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --