Miguel Hernandez-Navarro 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MIGUEL HERNANDEZ-NAVARRO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73895
Agency No. A92-187-850
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Miguel Hernandez-Navarro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s removal order. We dismiss the petition for review.
FILED
OCT 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73895 2
We lack jurisdiction to review Hernandez-Navarro’s contention that he
qualifies for relief under former section 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (repealed
1996), as an inadmissible, rather than a removable, alien because he failed to
exhaust this claim before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678
(9th Cir. 2004); see also Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203, 1208 (9th Cir. 2009)
(en banc) (when a petitioner files a brief before the BIA, the petitioner will “be
deemed to have exhausted only those issues he raised and argued in his brief before
the BIA”) (internal citations omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --