Franklin Agustin Garcia- Aucca 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FRANKLIN AGUSTIN GARCIA-
AUCCA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71328
Agency No. A046-790-055
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.
Franklin Agustin Garcia-Aucca, native and citizen of Peru, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming
the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our
FILED
JUL 07 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-71328 2
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. See Bromfield v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d
1071, 1075 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that the jurisdiction stripping provision found
at 8 U.S.C. § 1242(a)(2)(C) applies only to removal orders, not to applications for
asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief). We dismiss in part and deny in
part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Garcia-Aucca’s contention that BIA abused
its discretion in declining to accept his untimely brief. See Zeitano v. Holder, 596
F.3d 517, 524-25 (9th Cir. 2010).
Garcia-Aucca does not challenge the BIA and IJ’s denial of his asylum,
withholding of removal, and CAT claims, and has therefore waived these issues.
See Martinez-Serranno v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259–60 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Issues
raised in a brief that are not supported by argument are deemed abandoned.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --