Jesus Penaloza-Herrera; Mariela Murillo-Tapia 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).
LR/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JESUS PENALOZA-HERRERA;
MARIELA MURILLO-TAPIA,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73724
Agency Nos. A078-019-985
A078-019-980
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jesus Penaloza-Herrera and Mariela Murillo-Tapia, natives and citizens of
Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
denying their motion to remand and dismissing their appeal from an immigration
FILED
FEB 23 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

LR/Research 07-73724 2
judge’s decision pretermitting their applications for cancellation of removal. We
deny the petition for review.
In their opening brief, petitioners fail to address, and therefore have waived
any challenge to, the agency’s dispositive determination that female petitioner
failed to meet the continuous physical presence requirement and both petitioners
failed to meet the requisite hardship standard. 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); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b). In light of this
disposition, we need not reach petitioners’ remaining contention relating to their
criminal conviction.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --