Claudia S. Orozco-Arroyo 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
CLAUDIA S. OROZCO-ARROYO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-73570
Agency No. A098-174-340
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Claudia S. Orozco-Arroyo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
FILED
JUL 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

06-73570 2
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her request for a continuance. Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
In her opening brief, Orozco-Arroyo fails to challenge the BIA’s dispositive
conclusion that it lacked jurisdiction because she had waived her right to appeal
pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(b)(1)(i)(D) in order to obtain a 120-day grant of
voluntary departure. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.
1996) (issues not supported by argument in a party’s opening brief are deemed
waived).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --